Can someone explain why the MRA4 has been cancelled before we screw up big time.

[DFM]

Mend em,

Thank you.:ok:

DFM over & out.

[keesje]

I did not spell out the previous 2xx replies, but I've always been amazed by the MR4 project

IMO two groups are to blame for the end result:

- the folks that convinced politics that it was smart and necessary to upgrade/rebuild the Nimrods instead of buying something of the shelf

- the folks that accepted this plan. What were they thinking..

The Dutch navy did the same thing. Successfully sticking /hanging on to cold war requirements, 18 hour ASW ranges, 15 crew members, not adjusting/scaling down for 15 years until some politician sees through the game played and wipes away everything.

If those air forces had traded in half their Nimrods/P3C for smaller aircraft 10-15 years ago, they would still have existed. Fishery / pollution / coast control with Nimrods, P3s is laughable and everybody knew. But proud guys had to hold on to the big glorious platforms, spanning the world seas.

http://www.airbusmilitary.com/Portals/0/Imgs/English/SurvCN235/Big01.jpg

[thunderbird7]

40+ year-old overweight and balding male.

Alas, this describes most of us associated with the Nimrod. But, we were soldiers once, and young :rolleyes:. And so was our platform, from the glory days of aviation.

We mean no harm by our reveries for the one true love of our lives, merely a desire to right the wrongs of our politicians.

Bring back Avro Ansons, that would be progress from what we have now! ( I believe that was said by the fledgling Coastal Command in 1939 )

[davejb]

Fishery / pollution / coast control with Nimrods, P3s is laughable and everybody knew. But proud guys had to hold on to the big glorious platforms, spanning the world seas.



This is so far off from reality it's laughable, you clearly haven't a clue what you are on about. Smaller aircraft could do these parts of the job, no doubt about it, but the part of the job that, for example, extended to 30W, or for the part of it that involved protection of our SSBNs, or for any one of a dozen other tasks that were regularly performed by Nimrod (and other NATO MPA) the bigger aircraft were needed. It's nothing to do with some sort of big boys toys rubbish. Operating radar, radio, electronic warfare, MAD and acoustics takes several bodies - real life is not like playing at it on the PC.

Dave

[Joe Black]

Well said Dave!

[Scuttled]

What davejb said. Fisheries, pollution and such other coastal patrol functions are the responsibility of other agencies.

The Nimrod was an ASW and ASUW (old speak) military platform, which also carried out a multitude of other essential military tasks. The SAR and fisheries stuff was very much ancillary tasking which was performed, when requested, if the aircraft were not busy doing their actual job, which was defending the country or training to do so.

Pretty picture though. :)

[BEagle]

BBC News - London 2012 Olympics fears over Nimrod plane scrapping (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-12248424)

The decision to scrap the new Nimrod MRA4 surveillance aircraft has prompted fears that it may leave a gap in security at the 2012 Olympic Games.

The nine planes had been due to play a major role in counter-terrorism from next year, but are now set to be axed as part of the defence cuts.

Angus Robertson MP said it meant "you can't protect the Olympics properly".

It just gets better and better......:\

[TheChitterneFlyer]

Actually, deferring the Olympics to another host country would have saved a $hit-pile of UK taxpayers money!

TCF

[PingDit]

The fact that there are plenty of alternatives to the Nimrod to carry out the fisheries side of things is true. However, what's really been missed here is the fact that the same airframes don't have much of a bomb-bay to carry air to ground missiles or torpedoes and their wings aren't really up to carrying Sidewinders/Paveways etc. Anti-submarine warfare was after all, one of our priorities. This will surely come back to bite us in the ar5e.

Ping

[Finnpog]

The contract signed to host the Olympics was even more watertight than that between BAE Systems and the MOD to build both carriers. Once that was signed (Tessa Jowell was it?) there was no backing out.

It seems to me that that somewhere after Haddon Cave was published that at a programme board meeting for the Nimrod 2000 (bis) project took a turn towards a Monty Python sketch.

MOD shiny: "Of course, the MRA4 specification does not have to specifically include concepts such as 'safe to fly' or 'airworthy to modern standards'. I take it that these are included in the build price."

BAES sales rep: "No. I must say that we were suprised that you hadn't included this - but you know your business better than us."

MOD: "I beg your pardon? Do you expect me to believe that you are building a product which won't pass muster and cold embarrass us all?"

BAES: "Why not? For years you have treated 'battlefield' work arounds as standard pactice. We have had hundreds of Tornados back for updates, but you have never wanted to pay to have them put back to factory condition. I admit, it does get on the tits of the blokes on the line, but you know your business better than us. We are still amazed that you only wanted to deliver 9 out of the 36 you ordered...but you know our business better than us."

[Finnpog]

Whlst I may have mocked, I truly believe that we need a highly capable, SAFE Nimrod-type asset. Fit it for PWIV, Brimstone and Storm Shadow and it could span an even greater number of operational requirements.

[tucumseh]

Finnpog

Your mocking is probably quite near the truth. MoD routinely let companies off the hook regarding warranties by completely ignoring the rules governing Service Engineered Mods (just one example).

But, under the current regs, you will never get a company to sign up to deliver an "airworthy" aircraft. There is much more to airworthiness than what they deliver; not least the above SEMs. What you ask them to deliver is a valid and verifiable Safety Case for the Build Standard agreed in the contract; thereafter MoD add their liabilities and justifications to the two higher level Safety Cases (i.e. the Project Director's and the RTSA's). (I know there are variations on this theme, so it is better just to quote the regs here). Even then, DE&S tech staffs will still be over-ruled by those who reckon this is a waste of money; who often cite the Services not asking for the money in the first place as justification.

I'm afraid this needs repeating. The very fact that the Nimrod IPT had to let a Safety Case task on BAeS means the MoD's Safety Management System regs were ignored, in that the requirement for continuous assessment was not implemented. This is why I have a degree of sympathy for the likes of Air Cdre Baber. The very fact he (or more likely someone in his team) let a Safety Case task puts him one-up on his predecessors and contemporaries. The question nobody asks, certainly not Haddon-Cave, was how many gaps in this audit trail did BAeS and MoD find during execution of this task? Gaps mean expensive and time consuming regression - in this case probably many many years.

What continues to astonish me is that this isn't trotted out by his defence and the predecessors investigated as well. Then you'd get into the real problems and. perhaps, an underlying reason for cancellation.

[keesje]

-> The Russian subs were gone a long time ago.

I stick to my opinion the sqd would still have existed and a (better) force would be available if they had traded in half their Nimrods for smaller aircraft 10-15 years ago.

But like the Dutch MLD they were proud, had a long rich tradition and strong backers everywhere.

I was on them 20yrs ago. Looking back I can only conclude they/we were justifying additional tasks keeping our beloved dyno's / jobs alive. Anyone who asked fundamental questions just didn't understand and we were there anyway.

Brimstones, Pavesways, trooptransport, come on..

BTW loved flights with the MPA's live at the NAS. But thats besides the discussion, or should be.

[davejb]

Still b******s I'm afraid.

[Scuttled]

Keesje

If you truly have an mpa background, I can only conclude that when you left you went to live in a cave on a desert island somewhere and have not read a newspaper since. Are you aware how unstable many countries are?

Russian subs have gone? Really? Okay, if you like. Ask a grownup.

What about the Chinese? North Koreans? Iranians? Indian/Pakistanis? And so on. SSKs are very cheap, bang for buck, when compared to the cost of a capital warship they can sink or cripple. For very little dosh indeed (think those brilliant exported German Type 209s) you can effectively close large areas of ocean and particularly choke points like the Straits of Hormuz. Forget the situation now, what of 5 years from now? It's just been proven, quite brilliantly by the UK, that you can't build new mpa overnight. And be certain you cannot build the crews from scratch in any sensible time frame either.

What is your issue with mra4 carrying Brimstone, Paveway etc? You've lost me. That was the future, given the funding. With a nice long standoff and loiter capability it was an attractive proposition.

If you've been away 20 years, I think you have little idea of what the military, including mpa, have been doing lately. Well done on the Cold War, waiting for Soviet Hordes to trample through Germany and further. As relevant as any other history lesson I guess. But the Russians and many other nations are a very different threat these days.

I really don't think you know what you are talking about.

[keesje]

I do not deny the world as it is or the operational requirements that result. I left 20 yrs ago and wasn't there for a long time, so I'm not really a militairy guy.

Still the fact governments wipe away assets like the MPA's is a clear sign something went wrong earlier and we can't only blame the government bodies that pulled the trigger. I you do, the world must look odd.

IMO the new world has different needs, scaring people the old world isn't gone and invisible evil doers are everywhere only works so long. Maybe there should indeed be a European naval command, our interests aren't that far apart. Maybe a clean sheet 40 yr proof requirements document should be drawn up. Maybe it shouldn't be an UAV, but 5-6 folks, powerfull sensors and high bandwidth connections should be enough.

Having the Nimrods around for another 30 years was an interesting idea, but I'm still amazed it came so far. For the overland operations it seems to me other sensors / platforms are better suited then the MPA's.

The Germans bought 5 Global Hawks for $ half a billion and 8 used (modified) P3Cc's for a similar amount of money. Compare that to the UK situation (Nimrods, billions spent, $6.4B budget, 7 yrs late, wiped away). I guess something was fundamentally wrong and the UK armed forced should look in the mirror too.

;)

[getsometimein]

MRA4 was a procurement and management issue, there was little other reason for its demise.

As for the lack of submarines...

Russia has 43+ active submarines. China is building a homegrown SSBN. Iran can close the straights of hormuz with 1 Kilo, given the 40% of the worlds sea-going oil transits this area, i'd say thats a big deal.

Every major player in the world is investing in MPA, except the UK.

5 years time we'll either buy old crapped out P3's, a cut down P8, or perhaps a fleet of Atlantiques/Dash8's/Challengers etc etc.

[GIATT]

5 years time we'll either buy old crapped out P3's, a cut down P8, or perhaps a fleet of Atlantiques/Dash8's/Challengers etc etc.

Think more along the lines of a rating hanging over the side with a glass bottomed bucket and a set of Dolphin Ears (http://www.dolphinear.com/).

[LookingNorth]

Iran can close the straights of hormuz with 1 Kilo

Oh come on, you wouldn't even need the ASW gear to see the thing and sink it. Even a Merlin could polish the bugger off. But it won't need to, because the Septics will sink the entire Iranian navy if they try any of that sort of nonsense.

[Scuttled]

LookingNorth

Very good point. Also if we need to send ground troops anywhere they could do it for us, hey no transports needed! Even better, just use US troops and we can bin the army too! Same for every other capability?

So let's just fold it all and hope the Septics will foot the bill for the entire world's policing for the forseeable future. I hope they don't mind.

[LookingNorth]

See, now you're getting it.

Frankly it seems like a better plan to me, compared with wasting billions of pounds, hundreds of British lives and tens of thousands of Johnny Foreigner's lives. Switerzerland and Ireland don't seem to be suffering much from Islamoterror, after all.

[Scuttled]

LookingNorth

You've cut the legs from under me. I was being, obviously, facetious. But I find it hard to argue with you and shall be voting for you when you put yourself forward. Do you have a newsletter and may I subscribe?

Are you the Defence Secretary having a bit of down time in the office in between erasing capabilities? You seem to have a very similar outlook if not. Your cover is blown.;)

[LookingNorth]

Well I did look at going into politics but to be frank, robbing banks seems to be a more honest occupation, and it seems you can get away scot free as long as you're employed by the bank at the time.

[Roland Pulfrew]

Oh come on, you wouldn't even need the ASW gear to see the thing and sink it. Even a Merlin could polish the bugger off. But it won't need to, because the Septics will sink the entire Iranian navy if they try any of that sort of nonsense.

Lookingnorth. You are SofS Def and I claim my £10.

May I just ask what your ASW pedigree is? And what do you know of the capabilities of the Kilo-class submarine?

And may I suggest you Google Iranian mini subs? Or for that matter fast attack craft or suicide boats?

[LookingNorth]

Oooh Iranian mini-subs! I'm quivering with terror. Not my problem, but more importantly not the RAF's problem. We can't fight every bloody war and - thankfully - the bank balance is finally convincing the big knobs that we can't afford to.

Any more ludicrous 'threats' to try and convince us that BWoS should have some more skips full of used fifties?

[Roland Pulfrew]

Hmmm. Thought so. :rolleyes:

[Biggus]

If the Straits of Hormuz are closed to all traffic then a coalition of the willing is formed, and takes part in any agreed military action against Iran to reverse the situation, on the basis that pretty much the whole world is effected. The UK contributes what it can/will to such a coalition.... (maybe we could do the catering?)

If the Straits of Hormuz are to be selectively closed - the question is how exactly? Stop and board all shipping (that won't be done using Kilos and mini subs). Turn back or impound all shipping going to destinations that Iran doesn't like? Where does the fuel used in the UK come from - does it for example include crude oil that is shipped to and refined in the Netherlands..?

Look beyond the glossy Janes and Intel briefings on sexy kit, and try to work out how/if it can be used practically in anything other than openly declared all-out warfare...

If Iran wants to take on the whole world, then using Kilos and mini subs to sink everything in the Straits might be a viable plan. If Iran doesn't want to take on the rest of the world.....

Using the Iranian scenario as justification for the MRA4 is grabbing at straws to put it mildly, which is not to say that there aren't more valid scenarios that could be used.

[getsometimein]

Sticking with the ASW threat...

Narco-subs (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Narco_submarine)

Drug Traffic Beneat the Waves (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/02/05/AR2008020503123.html)

Fish Poaching using Submarines (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/poland/8214666/Polish-poachers-use-submarine-to-catch-fish.html)

Seems difficult for people to accept that there is more than the military than shooting people.

There wasn't just 1 cold war, there are lots of cold wars...

[keesje]

Fish Poaching using Submarines

From he article

"They drilled a hole in the ice and then dropped the submarine in on a tether," said Romuald Piecuch, a local police spokesman. "

:}

Small target, but a couple Mk 11s could do the job, maybe they could install a M230 to cut some holes for them in the ice. Maybe some customized stuff to look through ice.

[Scuttled]

Keesje

This changes everything I am sure you agree. If some men can get away with 40kg of fish over a few days, well....... Enough is enough.

I shall send a link for this to our, and your, Prime Ministers. This stops now. We acquire 50, no 60... Call it 100 state of the art MPA and invade Poland.

Mk 11s don't make it clear how much these fishermen have offended us either. We go nucleur, strategic, not tactical, as soon as the MPA are available.

BAe have the contract for the 200 MPA and assure us that the Minrod MRA 5 (Minrod 3000) will be in service by 2020. We go then. The budget is £500,000,000,000 and a smiling BAe contract negotiator told the press that there is a possibility that the aircraft will be on budget whilst tightening the vice on the balls of the 13 year old Air Training Corp cadet the RAF sent to seal the deal water tight.

Muttering something about "..... of course the wings, engines and avionics will be available for a small extra charge," the BAe lawyers left in a solid gold bus.

The future is bright. B&stard thieving Polish Fishing Chaps...... We're coming for you.

[DFM]

An MoD spokesperson has apparently allayed all our fears with this well prepared statement when pressed on how we will fill the capability gap due to the demise of the UK LRMPA.
Apparently: “We will continue joint maritime patrol activities with our allies and will ensure the integrity of UK waters by utilising a range of other military assets, including Type 23 Frigates, Merlin Anti Submarine Warfare helicopters and Hercules C-130 aircraft,".

In the immortal words of Mr William Connolly………Oh you think so!

I still hope we can get some inside photos of the orchestrated act of vandalism. So when the integrity of UK waters is not maintained by the platforms mentioned we can remind people what the Govt actually sanctioned. Notwithstanding the undoubted specialist ability and track record of the C-130, T-23 and Merlin, these platforms will quite clearly not fill the gap left by the loss of the MRA4.

DFM over & out

[DFM]

A quote in the Telegraph on the day we started to destroy them:

Scrapping the RAF's £4bn Nimrod fleet 'risks UK security'

The scrapping of the RAF’s £4 billion fleet of Nimrod surveillance aircraft will create a “massive security gap”, the country’s leading military figures have warned.

No **** :ugh:

Just a pity that some gentlemen with a little more clout who aren't retired (just yet) didn't stand up and comment when the opportunity was there. The silence from those within appeased and by default condoned a Govt decision that is dangerous. And it is because it is dangerous and risks UK security that these serving VSOs and senior CS within MoD should have broken ranks and made their views public.

Too late now; let's just wait until their autobographies hit the street I suppose. :=


DFM over & out

[Finningley Boy]

Well those Gentlemen with the clout to which you refer are apparently quite happy that the correct balance has been struck etc etc!:}

FB:)

[fincastle84]

I've just received this from an ex crew chief mate, now retired near to EGQK.

I couldn't put it better myself.

End of an Era




We gather in these hallowed halls and remember times now past.
The laughs we shared, and the gallant deeds; but now the die is cast.
For the MOD and Air Command and a government coalition,
Has axed our fleet and closed our base, but will rue this daft decision.


For it makes no sense to us at all, for on this island nation.
No long range airborne maritime force is a military abomination.
But we should not lie and lick our wounds, and fade into the night.
For what Kinloss now needs of us, that we may serve her right.


Is to celebrate her glorious past, and all that we’ve endured.
For overland, and over seas we kept this land secured.
And remember all of those who came, and ran with us this course,
All those who served and those who died, with honour on this force.


Though politics and budgets cuts have torn this fleet asunder,
We’ll fondly bid farewell Kinloss, and to the mighty hunter.
And tirelessly we’ll work away, with emotional reserves.
To close her down with dignity; it’s the least that she deserves.


The die is cast; the decision made; twas others who sealed our fate.
They’ll come to rue their big mistake, but sadly all too late.
So we’ll say to those in their ivory towers, who presided o’er this farce.
Ye can take yer Strategic Defence Review and shove it up yer *rse.

[tilleydog1]

Fincastle 84,

That is brilliant!

And so true.

[Neptunus Rex]

Thanks Fin.

That clouded my vision for a moment or twain, so to restore it, I had to broach a bottle of Single Malt.

Slanje!

Neppie - ex 120 (Class of '66)

[Scuttled]

Can the ex crew chief be named? Ask him, he should be credited for that wonderful poem.

[Roadster280]

We will continue joint maritime patrol activities with our allies and will ensure the integrity of UK waters by utilising a range of other military assets, including Type 23 Frigates, Merlin Anti Submarine Warfare helicopters and Hercules C-130 aircraft,".

http://media.ebaumsworld.com/mediaFiles/picture/554824/808601.jpg

[Golf-Mike-Mike]

Don't the relatively new Bombardier Sentinels based at RAF Waddington perform a similar function to the scrapped Nimrods?

[Lyneham Lad]

I've just received this from an ex crew chief mate, now retired near to EGQK.

I couldn't put it better myself.

End of an Era

Brilliant and sadly accurate summation of a dire situation. :{

Perhaps the MP for the relevant constituency could be persuaded to read it out in the House of Commons? :E

[GarageYears]

Don't the relatively new Bombardier Sentinels based at RAF Waddington perform a similar function to the scrapped Nimrods?

Er, no, and....

The UK government's Strategic Defence and Security Review (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strategic_Defence_and_Security_Review) announced its intention to "withdraw the Sentinel airborne ground surveillance aircraft once it is no longer required to support operations in Afghanistan

Nice :ugh:

- GY

[Duncan D'Sorderlee]

I'm not sure that the author of the poem above ever attained the skill level required to be a crew chief on the Mighty Hunter - he was OC Eng Wg!

Duncs:ok:

[fincastle84]

Hi Duncs.

I didn't say that my mate was the author, just the conduit!

A sad day in military history, the death of MPA in the history of the RAF.

[Duncan D'Sorderlee]

Fin,

I know. Scuttled assumed that it was; I was just trying to clarify.

Incidentally, it was met with a standing ovation!

Duncs:ok:

[Lima Juliet]

A little darker :E

Be Gone!… Be Gone!… Foul Nimrod All…
The Great and Good … Besmirch thou Fall
British aircraft industry …that walked so tall…
Thy maker’s stink doth cover all.
Thou Hated Trespasser ….Thou Beast of ill …
thy swindling ways…doth capability kill.
Ye shall not stay! …. nor rule our day!…
for Spring doth come to tame.
And Scavenger shall follow quickly… to end your frost filled reign.

:eek:

[ShortFatOne]

I'm sure you will be heart-broken to know that I am adding you to my Ignore list.

May I suggest that anyone else who no longer wishes to listen to the drivelling idiot (ideal candidate for future Chief of the Air Staff if you ask me) does the same?

[Roland Pulfrew]

LJ

If you are genuinely suggesting that the paper programme currently called Scavenger can get close to replacing the MRA4's capability (or for that matter MR2's capability) you are:

a. T** Mc****
b. A BWoS senior neddy
c. Deluded
d. Living in cloud cuckoo land
e. All of the above

Not before 2030 (at the earliest). And not without a massive financial injection. UAVs are not the panacea that some of the senior airships think they are. They appear to be guilty of being seduced by the unproven, untested, in fact not yet designed, shiny, shiny.

[Sir George Cayley]

Aren't all new bits of kit shiny and unproven?

SGC

[Lima Juliet]

http://img19.photobucket.com/albums/v56/ottoautopilot/fished-in-small.jpg

I don't know, you (ex) kipper mates are such easy bait...:E

[keesje]

You can see the Nimrods beeing scrapped at BBC. Must be a sad sight for all spending a good deal of energy and their life with those legendary machines.. Treasure the memories, books, youtubes and your collegeas will stay.


BBC News - Nimrod aircraft scrapped at Stockport BAE factory (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-12292390)

[Foxed Moth]

It is perhaps of interest that nobody has answered the original question of this thread after some months, other than by guessing and often guessing is all one can do until 25 or 30 years have elapsed and documents presently classified are revealed to public gaze.

It is also perhaps of interest that tiny New Zealand today has more MPA assets than does the UK.

Moreover, NZ is presently upgrading its six P-3C Orions and the first one, after all manner of delays, some of them due to the original airframe and not the new software, not to mention at least one birdstrike during testing, is due back from the US in a few months as the first P-3K2.

I have flown an eight hour sortie in one of the P-3Cs and have no doubt that with the enhanced capabilities of the P-3K2 and its Elta radar that the RNZAF will have both the personnel and the platforms that many other nations will envy.

But while that is pleasing if you are domiciled in NZ, as I am, it is surely fundamentally horribly wrong that the RNZAF should have far greater maritime surveillance capabilities than does the RAF.

Nor are UAVs or RPAs being ignored for when I talked to the Minister of Defence a few weeks ago he acknowledge that they may, in future, have a role to play.

He also mentioned the P-8 and told me about the small fleet of converted commercial aircraft being considered for SAR missions.

The 'two hours later' heading refers to the time it has taken me to read this thread from its beginning.

It is an ironic twist on the ancient adage that capabilities take years to acquire but intentions can change overnight.

The ghosts of the crews of Short Singapores, Sunderlands, Shackletons and MR2s will surely be distressed as they watch MR4s being scrapped and of course it is that scrapping that most people, certainly the mainstream media have focussed on.

That screens have been erected in a futile attempt to stop cameras observing the carnage only makes it more appealing to take a camera higher and show the broken metal.

But that is not really the point ... the point that matters, the point that ALWAYS matters and is almost always overlooked, is not something you can easily capture on film.

It is the broken hearts, the crushing of hopes, the squandering of talent, the throwing away of expertise in the men and women who made MPA work.

Because, no matter what the platform, no matter how sophisticated the sensors, what Nimrod did came down to people who had spent years and years out over the seas and slowly, slowly learning their art.

You can easily attach a price tag to the hardware, to the software but to have crews who between then have more than a century of MPA experience, is priceless.

That is the biggest lost. And by far the most difficult and time consuming to regain. Acquiring decades of experience, after all, requires decades.

There are no short cuts and saving money in 'peace time' always costs more lives in war time.

[fincastle84]

You've summed it up extremely well, sadly!

[iRaven]

DFM

Your main reasons to your main questions are answered in today's Sunday papers. If you care to roll back the threads you will see half a dozen Pruners were trying to spell this out - but obviously couldn't because it was still sensitive (now it's out there it isn't so much anymore).

I suggest those that tried to defend the MRA4 by saying it was great and just about ready; those that had flown it or worked on it, need to take a large dose of STFU!

I am pleased someone had the b@lls to cancel it so we never have to console the likes of Tapper's Dad again.

Why was it cancelled? It was nowhere near being safe enough to fly in today's world and enough was enough.

iRaven

[manccowboy]

Why was it cancelled? It was nowhere near being safe enough to fly in today's world and enough was enough.

Utter bollocks :rolleyes:
Its statements like this that have led to the position we are now in with the MRA4.
People who no fookall should STFU

[davejb]

Anybody got a link to an article revealing

I suggest those that tried to defend the MRA4 by saying it was great and just about ready; those that had flown it or worked on it, need to take a large dose of STFU!



because the only online articles dated 30 Jan that I can find are all still calling for Fox/Cameron's heads, and saying quite the opposite to what iRaven is suggesting.

As for the rudeness - STFU yourself.

Dave

Edited to add - okay, the list is on another Nimrod thread, apparently the info was in the Times.

[JFZ90]

Your main reasons to your main questions are answered in today's Sunday papers. ......Why was it cancelled? It was nowhere near being safe enough to fly in today's world and enough was enough.

A bit naive - it was cancelled to save money pure and simple - which the torys have as much as admitted in any case.

The rest are all excuses being wheeled out to lessen the association between themselves, savage cuts and the resulting decimation of the armed forces. The ST seem content to swallow and repeat this.

[Biggus]

The previous administration ducked having a defence review until after the general election.

Be in no doubt that if they were still in power a defence review would also have resulted in cuts (the main reason not to have it before the election - to avoid any bad PR fallout with the voters). All you can "what if" about is how big the cuts would have been under a Labour administration, and what would have gone.

The truth is, we will never know...

[RumPunch]

Well for the FJ community trips across the pond will be a bit more risky now, saying that the option to hop across Iceland Greenland is not as viable now with Diversion, we do have Lossie and Kinloss...oh hold on we dont . Lajes it is :ok:

[fergineer]

Foxed moth.....Since when was NZ a tiny place, area wise its bigger than the UK!!!!! Agree with what you say about the new a/c coming in, it takes time but when they come they will be great something MOD need to take on board

[DFM]

iRaven,

The Sunday Times story clearly suffers from a total lack of technical understanding and context. So you will not be surprised to hear that, in my opinion, this article does not answer my original question or provide the reasoning behind the cancellation of the MRA4. As for the Ppruners who have been trying to spell it out under an apparent cloud of secrecy but were afraid to break ranks; well I guess now they can all come forward with the juicy details. :rolleyes:

I have many reasons why I think the article is just another piece of journalistic licence to provide sensational stories rather than a well constructed attempt to find the truth. But rather than get into the emotive language that they ply so well, I will respond with a couple of points that are based on facts and in a context that hopefully speaks for itself.

Firstly, I trust the BAes (inc contractors) and RAF engineers professionalism and intimate knowledge of the air vehicle above that of a Sunday newspaper. These engineers were responsible for the aircraft's construction, servicing, maintenance and its introduction into service; whereas the newspaper was trying to make capital out of a technical report that they clearly do not understand. Those same engineers were content that they were very close to reaching the major hurdle of RTS certification. Therefore, I and every other member of the current MPA community that I have spoken to were content with its safety.

Secondly, do you not think it is a touch implausible that CAS would have risked his reputation within Govt and MoD circles in defending the MRA4 to the hilt if it was so dangerous? Or are you suggesting he wasn’t briefed about all these supposed shortfalls and critical safety issues? Much more important than the reputation of CAS though; ask the ShortFatOne (amongst others) if he was content with the overall safety of this aircraft.

e.g. A Quote from an SFO post in Oct 10 that I hope he will not mind me using:

“I cannot say what other platforms are doing, I don't have first hand experience of them but if they are applying the rules with the rigour that we did (and I am sure they are?) then we must have the safest fleets of aircraft in the world (does that last bit sound a little too sarcastic?).

A sad end to what promised to be one of the most capable, flexible, agile and adaptable platforms the RAF had had for years. Still, I look back on my 150 hours airborne (and about 3000 in the simulator) with fond memories and a wistful glint in my eye (possibly caused by a small tear).”


Finally, I wonder if the true reason may be linked to the alarmingly rapid start to the act of vandalism this week, though I am still not quite sure why or how that would be. However, what I am sure of is that I do not believe newspapers when they have a choice between sensationalism and the more mundane truth, even when they have the truth in their hands……which in this case I would say they do not.

The Sunday Times received restricted information about specific technical defects or specification issues that were catalogued and in the process of being addressed. That’s what engineers do with pre-production aircraft before they go into production; just a thought but it is also what they do throughout the life of any aircraft. As I have said previously; the RTS issue for the MRA4 was always going to be emotive and all those close to the project know that this has undoubtedly been unduly influenced by the fall-out from the “Nimrod” handle as well as being the first in-production aircraft post the advent of MAA.

This is yet another example of that.


DFM over & out

[manccowboy]

Those same engineers were content that they were very close to reaching the major hurdle of RTS certification. Therefore, I and every other member of the current MPA community that I have spoken to were content with its safety.

Maybe the disbelievers can just for a moment give this quote a thought rather than the **** that has been sprouted on here and in the papers.

The MRA4 was SAFE, was ready to FLY but was culled as a ill thought out cost saving exercise that ultimately will cost more than it ever saved.

Shame on you people who disbelieved and shame on you fookers who killed it.....one day this will come back to bite you.

[RumPunch]

Manccowboy well said :D

We have lost something good but its now time to let it go and move on. Nothing will bring it back unfortunately but those that have chopped it this will come back and haunt them there is no doubt on that.
Its just a shame there is so much more that can be said but for many of us its not worth loosing our job over. The truth will come out soon though that Is 100% certain.

[iRaven]

From today's Sunday Times...

THE nine Nimrod aircraft cancelled amid a storm of condemnation and at a cost of £4 billion were designed with the same critical safety fault blamed for the downing of an RAF Nimrod in 2006 with the loss of 14 lives.
Liam Fox, the defence secretary, has been accused of leaving a “massive gap” in the nation’s security by scrapping the fleet of maritime patrol planes.
But classified documents seen by The Sunday Times reveal Ministry of Defence (MoD) safety tests conducted last year on the first Nimrod MRA4, built by BAE Systems, found “several hundred design non-compliances”.
Among them were problems opening and closing the bomb bay doors, failures of the landing gear to deploy, overheating engines and gaps in the engine walls, limitations operating in icy conditions, and concerns that “a single bird-strike” could disable the aircraft’s controls.
However, the most serious problem discovered by Defence Equipment and Support (DE&S) inspectors at MoD Abbey Wood in Bristol involved a stillunresolved design flaw. It concerns the proximity of a hot air pipe to an uninsulated fuel line, widely blamed for an explosion on board Nimrod XV230 on September 2, 2006, near Kandahar airport in Afghanistan. A three-page summary of the faults, labelled “restricted” and written on September 17, last year, stated: “The work being undertaken by the MoD to validate the BAE Systems aircraft’s safety case during the week of September 13, 2010, identified a potentially serious design defect: a small section of a hot air pipe was discovered to be uninsulated in an area that also contains fuel pipes, which is outside the design regulations.”
It added: “Parallels could be drawn between this design defect and that which is thought to have caused the loss of the Nimrod MR2 (XV230) in Afghanistan in September 2006 resulting in the death of 14 personnel.”
The revelations support Fox’s claim that the aircraft simply was not airworthy. The Nimrod is designed as a maritime aircraft capable of roles including submarine detection and warfare, and long-range sea rescue.
But the DE&S report found the ability of the new MRA4 aircraft to drop sonar buoys, depth charges or life rafts would be seriously hampered: “The aircraft will enter service with a restriction preventing the opening of the bomb bay doors and a longer term solution has yet to be found.”
It added: “A single bird-strike has a potential to cause it critical damage, which could disable primary aileron flight control to both wings.” The first “few flights” of the first Nimrod saw it failing to deploy its nose landing gear “due to incorrect tolerance design”. Inspectors also found the Nimrod had “severe limitations for operating in icing [sic] conditions”, without going into detail, and said there were unresolved problems with “wing fatigue”.
They also highlighted overheating in the engine bay, and gaps in the engine bay firewalls that BAE Systems had claimed did not exist: “BAES had previously produced a report that incorrectly stated that these had been inspected and met design and build standards.”
The MoD report concluded: “MRA4 carries in total several hundred design non-compliances. Whilst many of these relate to legacy design and necessary design constraints, a significant number (including some of the issues listed above) are not what we would expect to find in a well-designed aircraft.”
Last night, a defence source said: “The project has been a disaster and should have been cancelled years ago.
“There were clearly serious safety concerns about the aircraft, and it is incredible that the flaw that saw 14 people killed near Kandahar was repeated in this new Nimrod. It would cost another £1 billion to fix all these problems, but there comes a point where you just have to say enough is enough.”
BAE Systems said: “At the time of the cancellation of the MRA4 programme, we were working with the Ministry of Defence — in the normal way — to resolve a number of issues relating to the aircraft.
“We are confident that these would have been resolved to enable the aircraft’s entry into service as planned

What I know about the MRA4 program over the last year or so:

1. Some bright spark put the main control box for the ailerons at the back of the bomb bay - open the doors and catch a bird and you go for a swim (at the very best!) :ugh:

2. The company tried to deliver the aircraft to the RAF without a sonobuoy clearance (hence you may as well use Sentry maritime modes) :ugh:

3. The flap brackets completely failed (on I think 2 out of 3) after just a bit of flying (this one is not mentioned by the ST) :ugh:

4. The nose gear had an issue with poor tolerance (just another indicator of shoddyness - see above and below for more) :ugh:

5. Hot air, fuel and an ignition source inside the same zonal area without a means to extinguish (:= - shame on you) and that was in the wing. :ugh:

6. A rudder that was too small and gave a pitiful amount of authority for VMCA and VMCG issues when assymetric :ugh: (I think they have got on top of that one).

7. An aircraft without an icing clearance - not too clever for something based in Scotland and that hunts in the Iceland-Faroes gap! :ugh:

8. Issues with build quality, where things were not torqued correctly or wire locked off correctly - so much so that the company were asked to go back and look at everything again plus get new signatures for all of the work :ugh:

Fine, you protect it all you like, but I for one am glad to waste £3-4Bn if its saves a RAF crew from pressing ahead for the sake of British industry for something that quite frankly was unsafe. Yes, you can "polish a turd" but it takes a lot of time, money and effort; something we don't have at present.

I suspect that CAS wanted to keep the capability (ie. long range ASW/ASuW) - but probably did not have this heap of sh!t in mind. Also, the investment appraisal board (IAB) for this Cat A project (>£400M) would have been told all of this by DE&S and then passed to the SoS Def. He would have been all too aware that it was time for "enough is enough".

Finally, this is never going to be remembered as a "TSR2 moment" but more akin to the "NimWACS debacle". Here's hoping there is an inquiry into this and that the true issues are brought out into the open of rank incompetence within the Company and areas of the MoD.

iRaven

[ShortFatOne]

All you have 'proven' is how little you know or understand (or want to).

[iRaven]

Stumpy

"A three-page summary of the faults, labelled “restricted” and written on September 17, last year [2010]" - I don't have to "prove" anything as someone else has already done it.

iRaven

[RumPunch]

Arrgghhhh :{

[Tappers Dad]

iRaven

All the faults you have listed in your post I heard about back in October last year via a reliable source. But I have one to add, when someone was attempting to repair a leaking fuel coupling as they undid the coupling the fuel pipes sprang apart approx 9ins. The pipes were too short to join together and had been forced together putting an intolerable strain on the coupling.
While I am here I also believe that ther will be no public inquiry into this fiasco as BAE Systems appear to be teflon coated. Remember how the National Fraud Office were told to drop their case days before it was due in court. Do your home work guys and find out why Big Business Rules !!!!
Plus the Chairman of BAE Systems is a member of the Prime Minister's Business Advisory Group.

[Doptrack]

So we now drop sonobuoys from the bomb bay do we??

And we're being blamed for the lack of a saftey case (and safety issues) on the GFE sonobuoys

Roughly translates as damned if you do and damned if you don't! :ugh:

[MOA]

Stumpy - stay away dude!

iRaven,

I worked with SFO on this project and anything he writes is completely 'un-spun' and correct as to the true state of the aircraft.

As to the so called 'list' it is very poor. I am travelling so don't want to waste time answering all points but here's a few.

VMCA - stall limited as predicted. I should know I personally flew the test points. Same with VMCL - both static and dynamic.

VMCG - very cross wind dependent and initially higher than predicted. Gurney flap on the rudder brought VMCG to a useable number. I should know, I personally flew the test points. VMC numbers are just that, numbers defined from test points - no handling issues as you suggest.

Sonobouy restriction. All test points flown, no issues. Again I should know... Awaiting the formal clearance following analysis. Agreed that it is poor that the aircraft did not have the clearance but it was on its way - no more flying needed.

Ailerons - it was the Aieron Feel Trim Unit located at the back of the bomb bay. Please show me a birdsrtike report from the MR2/MR1 from in the bomb bay - not a credible failure...

I could go on but the snow is too good.

I accept that the aircraft is cancelled but true facts only please.

SFO/Betty/Rum stay strong!

[XV277]

Nor are UAVs or RPAs being ignored for when I talked to the Minister of Defence a few weeks ago he acknowledge that they may, in future, have a role to play.

He also mentioned the P-8 and told me about the small fleet of converted commercial aircraft being considered for SAR missions.



He was interviewed on the BBC last week and said that we may need to replace the capability, but that Nimrod wasn't the aircraft for the long term. Interesting comments, and ones I haven't seen repeated elsewhere.

I still suspect we'll see P-8s operating in UK service by 2020.

[MFC_Fly]

MOA:
I worked with SFO on this projectWhat? You worked with the Serious Fraud Office during this BAES project :sad:

:E

[manccowboy]

MOA
As to the so called 'list' it is very poor. I am travelling si don't want to waste time answering all points but here's a few.

With you here :ok:, in fact that list is pure fiction dreamed up to dupe the papers and the public into believing the MRA4 was unsafe& to basically justifying its axing, and judging by some of the posts on here that list has met its aim.

Im still gobsmacked that people on these forums still dispute what the people who flew this aircraft & who built this aircraft have said in its defense over some bull**** that non technical people have rolled out to justify its destruction.

Hiding a aircraft while you cut it up speaks volumes.

As for certain people being bullet proof and non accountable is just asking for the same mistakes to be made again and again and again, this culture needs addressing but we all know that wont happen because it will be a admission of mismanagement by the very highest.

While we have these sort of people in power the UK is fooked.

[Pig Of The Poke]

Tappers Dad

"All the faults you have listed in your post I heard about back in October last year via a reliable source. But I have one to add, when someone was attempting to repair a leaking fuel coupling as they undid the coupling the fuel pipes sprang apart approx 9ins. The pipes were too short to join together and had been forced together putting an intolerable strain on the coupling."

I have to ask if you really and honestly believe that to be true. Do you really believe you can stretch a solid double walled fuel pipe by 9 inches on installation? If you do, you have obviously never been near an aircraft which is being built.

Lets suppose some magical situation where whilst on jacks a pipe is fitted and then when lowered onto the landing gear and fuelled some part of the aircraft magically moves 9 inches relative to another. The fuel pipe clamps are good but not infinitely strong and the pipe would snap instantly. No pipe clamp in existence could hold the multiple tons of force which would be required to put a 9 inch deflection in any direction into a pipe!

PotP

[Cows getting bigger]

Is it all in a name? Place yourself in the politician's shoes - got to cut expenditure, lots of it. The military have this thing called Nimrod and you recollect a scandal involving a funny shaped thing with a bulbous nose & tail when you were a teenager. You also have a bit of paper called Haddon-Cave where the same word appears. The military brass come in with their list of big projects and the 'N' word appears again - it looks as if it is running late with a bit of risk. To me, it is a politician's no-brainer.

Of course the real argument is about capability gaps and how to fill these.

[ShortFatOne]

Enjoy the slopes dude.:ok:

[Lima Juliet]

Now I've been told the same as Tapper's Dad - fuel unions undone and twang! (not sure about 9 inches though). This was from a couple of officer engineers close to the project at HQ Air and also from someone in DE&S. Also, most of the same issues were explained by these people as iRaven wrote about.

Now either there is the greatest spoof going on from 2 RAF engineers and 1 DE&S engineer to at least 3 unconnected individuals (Tapper's Dad, iRaven and me) and a fake "Restricted" letter from DE&S to the Sunday Times, or something fishy is going on. :confused:

Sounds like time for an Public Inquiry to me. We need to know the definative facts so this is settled once and for all; and that we never make the same mistake again with the company/contract/project management (delete as applicable).

LJ

[iRaven]

Well Dr Fox is also part of this "spoof" then...


The decision to scrap the Nimrod MRA4 programme was one of the most difficult we had to take. This capability was conceived to provide the very outermost ring of long-range layered reconnaissance. The original plan conceived in 1996 was for 21 aircraft to be delivered in 2003. By the time the new Government took office in 2010 the programme had already been reduced to just nine aircraft, was almost £800m over budget with the unit cost of each aircraft ballooning by 300 per cent, and the aircraft were still nowhere near ready to enter service. The single MRA4 aircraft that had been delivered to the RAF was so riddled with flaws it could not pass its flight tests, it was simply unsafe to fly. I am not prepared to put our service personnel into any plane that isn’t safe. It would have taken more money and more time to rectify all the problems, if it was possible at all, and the onward cost of sustaining even the reduced fleet over the next ten years was a prohibitive £2bn. So we took the decision not to throw good money after bad. In the final analysis, it had to go.

I recognise the outstanding service given to the nation by the original Nimrod for over 40 years and that MRA4 would have been great to have, if it had worked. But the plain fact is that it didn’t. Because the airframes are based on a 1940s design, there is no realistic demand for them, and storing them would not be cost effective. We are having to pay to dispose of the aircraft but this is dwarfed by the projected cost of continuing to blindly pursue it. Labour had already retired the Nimrod MR2 last year before the MRA4 was ready, so the capability has already been gapped for over a year. We are mitigating the risk incurred by using other capabilities, such as Frigates, Merlin helicopters and Hercules aircraft. Operations in Afghanistan are not affected by this decision and we will continue to cover long-range Search and Rescue around the UK with a number of aircraft that can fulfil this role.




He seems very sure of his facts now, doesn't he?

iRaven

PS - he also reiterated these facts in Defence Oral Questions at about 1500hrs in the House today (31 Jan 11).

[JFZ90]

Some alternative emphasis:


The decision to scrap the Nimrod MRA4 programme was one of the most difficult we had to take.

...as it was fundamentally about saving money, and creating a capability gap with no replacement planned....

The single MRA4 aircraft that had been delivered to the RAF was so riddled with flaws it could not pass its flight tests, it was simply unsafe to fly. I am not prepared to put our service personnel into any plane that isn’t safe.

...technically true, but isn't this a temporary issue, not a permanent one - spin...?!

It would have taken more money and more time to rectify all the problems, if it was possible at all, and the onward cost of sustaining even the reduced fleet over the next ten years was a prohibitive £2bn.

...wasn't the £2Bn just the expected running costs ove 10 years?

So we took the decision not to throw good money after bad. In the final analysis, it had to go......We are having to pay to dispose of the aircraft but this is dwarfed by the projected cost of continuing to blindly pursue it.

....blindly pursue it = pay to support it...?

Labour had already retired the Nimrod MR2 last year before the MRA4 was ready, so the capability has already been gapped for over a year.

.....on the basis that the gap would be short when MRA4 came in, not permanent, and skills fade would be manageable? The skill fade now will be irrecoverable.

[LookingNorth]

Irrecoverable? Makes you wonder how we ever managed to get into maritime patrol and sub hunting in the first place.

The hysterics around the cull of this white elephant get better all the time.

[cazatou]

I have been looking through a book (that was bought for me by my late first Wife some 40 years ago) which contains the profile of the Hawker Siddeley 801 Nimrod aircraft. That aircraft was based on the Comet 4C aircraft which had been operated by the RAF since February 1962. The RAF had, however, been operating Comet Mk2s since June 1956. The original Comets entered service with BOAC on 2nd May 1952 but the first flight of the aircraft was 27 July 1949. If the Comet was female it would be drawing its old age pension by now - no matter how many "facelifts" it had been given. The Nimrod variant first flew on the 23 May 1967- nearly 44 years ago whilst I was on my first OCU. In 6 months time I will eligible for the State Old age Pension.

If the RAF had persevered with well proven aircraft types in specialist roles then Coastal Command would have been operating with Consolidated Liberators well into the latter part of the 20th Century.

[The B Word]

"White Elephant"? More like "White Whale?" Come to think of it the "BAES Moby Dick MRA4" would have made a great name. :E

[GOLF_BRAVO_ZULU]

cazatou sums this up very well; few people actually understand the Nimrod MK4. How do you argue from such a starting point?

Clearly, if you take the formers and stringers designed for a Comet 4, shortened by 6' 6", the tailplane and fin core, the product must be a Comet. Boeing must agonise over that logic every time they recycle a B707.

Can somebody remind me how old the RR Trent is now?

[dervish]

From Hansard, 20th Feb 2003

Operational Requirement

Nimrod, Maritime Patrol Aircraft (MPA), with their reach and large area coverage, uniquely provide the long range maritime area surveillance and attack capability necessary to assure secure battlespace in the littoral. Without this assured access, the risk of loss of deployed forces, including CVF, from a continuing surface and sub-surface threat, would severely limit our ability to conduct post SDR joint and expeditionary warfare. MPA provide the bedrock of maritime capability


Can we assume Dr Fox is now prepared to accept these risks?

[The B Word]

Dervish

That Hansard quote is 8 years old from a different Govt that was prepared to live without long range aviation ASW/ASUW from 2009 (when the option to axe MR2 was made).

Plus if you re-read the Dr Fox quote, he acknowledges the current risk and mitigates it with RN 'dippers', Type 23, C130 and I guess what he means is E3D doing long range 'surpic'.

The B Word

[cazatou]

GBZ

The RB 50 Trent ran for 633 hrs on test before being fitted to a Meteor which first flew on 20 September 1945.

The "New" Trent first ran in August 1990.

[Dave Angel]

September 2010….

“Dear David ,……..

Frankly this process is looking less and less defensible as a proper SDSR (Strategic Defence and Strategy Review) and more like a “super CSR” (Comprehensive Spending Review). If it continues on its current trajectory it is likely to have grave political consequences for us, destroying much of the reputation and capital you, and we, have built up in recent years……..

Deletion of the Nimrod MR4 will limit our ability to deploy maritime forces rapidly into high-threat areas, increase the risk to the Deterrent, compromise maritime CT (counter terrorism), remove long range search and rescue, and delete one element of our Falklands reinforcement plan………..

Even at this stage we should be looking at the strategic and security implications of our decisions. It would be a great pity if, having championed the cause of our Armed Forces and set up the innovation of the NSC, we simply produced a cuts package. Cuts there will have to be. Coherence, we cannot do without, if there is to be any chance of a credible narrative.

Yours
Liam Fox.”

THEN……

The Telegraph - By Liam Fox 28 Jan 2011

“…….The decision to scrap the Nimrod MRA4 programme was one of the most difficult we had to take. This capability was conceived to provide the very outermost ring of long-range layered reconnaissance. The original plan conceived in 1996 was for 21 aircraft to be delivered in 2003. By the time the new Government took office in 2010 the programme had already been reduced to just nine aircraft, was almost £800m over budget with the unit cost of each aircraft ballooning by 300 per cent, and the aircraft were still nowhere near ready to enter service. The single MRA4 aircraft that had been delivered to the RAF was so riddled with flaws it could not pass its flight tests, it was simply unsafe to fly. I am not prepared to put our service personnel into any plane that isn’t safe. It would have taken more money and more time to rectify all the problems, if it was possible at all, and the onward cost of sustaining even the reduced fleet over the next ten years was a prohibitive £2bn. So we took the decision not to throw good money after bad. In the final analysis, it had to go……..”

So Liam why were you championing it a matter of a few short months ago? :ugh:

Another reason why you should never trust a politician, as the Big Yin says:

"Anyone who wants to become a politician should be excluded from office for that very same reason"

Utter Cnuts the lot of them!

[RansS9]

If YOU were allowed to construct the requirement for the next MPA what would it be and how do YOU think it would be best achieved ?

(Assuming.... possibly incorrectly..... that some aspects can be debated without breaking the Official Secrets Act!)

Reading the comments of people who were, in the past or recently, involved in this community I am interested to know how you would answer the above. Hypothetically unhindered by miltary, political, or coporate arselicking requirements but definately hindered by financial contraints (not necessarily the present ones but money definately is an object) and a sensible balance between technologically aspirational and technologically achievable within a reasonable time frame.

Please note; Not a Russian Spy, Not a Journo on a fishing trip.. just an interested UK Taxpayer.

Thanks TIM

[camelspyyder]

Some experienced people to fly it would be a good start so we'd better get the new wonderjet ready before Sep 2012. That's when we the crews follow the MRA4 onto the scapheap...:ugh:

CS

[Lima Juliet]

Camelspyder

That'll be the chaps on exchange around the globe (including those with the RN) and also the chaps at Dam Neck, then.

I also heard of a plan to try and preserve some of the expertise under some type of "seedcorn" affair - basically farming out a few key people to ensure that we can build a capability back up again.

Nothing known about for the short term but, if I were a betting man, we'll be back in the LR ASW/ASuW game before 2020.

LJ

[Finnpog]

So as not to repeat the merry go round of having a the only fleet of 10 of a certain type of airframe in the world with all the ****s and giggles of the logistics train which that entails there should be a requirement that the airframe must be based upon an existing craft of which there are at least 200 currently flying in the world.

Couple this with a criterion requiring the base aircraft to been manufactured as a new build since 2000.

That may help a tad.

[davejb]

Expertise is gained over a fair old length of time, not something that a handful of 'seedcorn' can upload into a few dozen ab initio students x years down the turnpike. Any significant outflow of sqn aircrew from the RAF would be very difficult to replace.... you can't teach experience, and the experience of aircrew on their Xth tour is what we'll be missing.

I'd want an aircraft with Searchwater in it, and a significantly good TAC NAV kit... I expect the wetties would like a darn good processor array too. ... Hmmm, I suspect I'm designing a Nimrod inside a different airframe here...<g>

[Ivan Rogov]

RansS9, seeing as you’re asking. From an operators perspective if the idiots realise what they have done then

It has to be an off the shelf design if you want to reduce the "risk" (whatever it is supposed to mean today :confused:) and cost, given what has just happened I would say there would be no appetite for risk at all.
The RJ has opened up new questions about procurement, if it is successful then maybe we should partner another Countries Forces and offer to pool our Crews while maintaining some sovereign control (It will be interesting to see if we can ensure our aims remain compatible, we can have very different policies. e.g.: Rendition flights)
However as has been said on various threads, our temptation to tinker with platforms to theoretically keep cash in the UK is almost impossible to resist. Unless there is total reform of the way we procure equipment then I believe we are doomed to make the same mistakes again.

Anyway :rolleyes:

Old P-3s from somewhere, possible but not very sensible, the arguments about 50s era designs, already worn out, out-dated equipment. Some in the desert, Canada not upgrading all its but all old.

New P-8s whenever they can get us on the production line, but the design is operationally unproven and new tactics being devised to cover deficiencies. BAMS would be needed to make it work as envisaged.

The Japanese XP-1 (P-1 I guess) again unproven and possibly risky support. Oh and they will not export it (yet). No doubt the most risky solution, but it does look to have a good MPA configuration, time will tell.

French Atlantique 2s if they would allow us to buy/use up the airframes they are not updating and then possibly put them through the update when we can afford it.

Bear F, only kidding!

These would all more or less cover the capability gap (In all MR2 tasks that I have been involved with) that we have had for nearly a year now.
If you want to trade off some capabilities then there are various smaller platforms that can provide some or lesser capabilities, such as

CN-235 or 295, ATR-72, Fokker 50/60, Dash 8, Do 328, SAAB 340 etc. I'm not sure which of these would be better, the 235/295 and Fokker 50/60 are the only ones I know that are in Military service rather than just an airliner with a radar and camera bolted on. Although the 235/295 looks the part I'd go with which ever has the best speed/endurance/range/capacity etc. The C-27 might work but isn't really an off the shelf MPA.

Personally I think Atlantiques would get us back in the game in maybe 3-5 years, P-8s at least 5-10 years. I was never a fan of the Atlantique but on paper it sounds good, 360 deg radar, fantastic visibility from flt deck, beams and nose! big bombay and floats on water, I've seen the pics :D
And of course never buy the A model of anything!

[RansS9]

Thanks for the reply..Like the "Bear" idea...perhaps we could pool crews as well !!

TIM

[XV277]

Personally I think Atlantiques would get us back in the game in maybe 3-5 years, P-8s at least 5-10 years. I was never a fan of the Atlantique but on paper it sounds good, 360 deg radar, fantastic visibility from flt deck, beams and nose! big bombay and floats on water, I've seen the pics :D
And of course never buy the A model of anything!

Would fit in with Dave's idea of inter-operability

[Green Flash]

Rolls Royce donks an' all.

[Duncan D'Sorderlee]

...and I believe that the French are looking to upgrade/replace their MPA in the near term.

Allez, allez, allez!

Duncs:ok:

[davejb]

Bittersweet,
I've just read an article in the 'Forres Gazette and loons chip wrapper' - Plessey trophy awarded to 120 Sqn for an ASW sortie prior to MR2 appearing in 'Autotrader'.

Of interest.... "WTF is Adey doing in that photo?" I asked myself.... crikey, R4 is boss of 120! (well done sunshine, if you are reading this).

Now chuck in S3 who is OC 42 ... various N2's who went on to multi starred rank, and is probably ACM of the RAF Admiral the honourable Lord Andy of Fryer by now - you know, I'm beginning to wonder why I never made Air Commode at least....

Dave

(1 - yes, I do know that's the not the way to spell it, before the grammar nazis pop up, and

2 - Yes, I do know it's because I'm a *** )

[Mad_Mark]

you know, I'm beginning to wonder why I never made Air Commode at least....
I also wonder the same thing about you Dave :E

Be nice to all those little 'angels' at FA :ok:

MadMark!!! :mad:

[DFM]

Two significant comments from Def Sec posted in the Telegraph that I think should be held up to scrutiny so we can establish where the truth ends and the spin starts.

“The single MRA4 aircraft that had been delivered to the RAF was so riddled with flaws it could not pass its flight tests, it was simply unsafe to fly. I am not prepared to put our service personnel into any plane that isn’t safe.”

Clearly nobody would put an aircraft into service that is unsafe to fly, but that is somewhat different than the situation we actually had. The MRA4 was in a phase of the program designed to secure a RTS; a process that it was near to completing. So let’s not spin it in an attempt to make it look like it would never pass and the Govt was simply protecting us from danger.


“We are mitigating the risk incurred by using other capabilities, such as Frigates, Merlin helicopters and Hercules aircraft.”

As Def Sec I sincerely hope he improves his briefing team if he believes the Frigates, Merlins and Hercules will fill this capability gap……..oh of course that is not what he is saying.“Mitigating the risk” is of course the spin in an attempt to hide the fact that the capability gap the Govt has created is the real danger.


And finally; the capability gap in Dr Fox’s own words in Sept 10:

“The deletion of the Nimrod MR4 will limit our ability to deploy maritime forces rapidly into high-threat areas, increase the risk to the Deterrent, compromise maritime CT (counter terrorism), remove long range search and rescue, and delete one element of our Falklands reinforcement plan....Even at this stage we should be looking at the strategic and security implications of our decisions. It would be a great pity if, having championed the cause of our Armed Forces and set up the innovation of the NSC, we simply produced a cuts package. Cuts there will have to be. Coherence, we cannot do without, if there is to be any chance of a credible narrative."



Lets sincerely hope the Telegraph follow his comments (past and present) up with some incisive journalism and dig a little deeper.


MoD Media report on visit to Kinloss by Min AF and minders last week:

SPIN- Min AF and co were really convincing in the defence of the capability gap they are not responsible for.

UNSPUN- Min AF and co lacked any credibility due to the fact that they were clearly pedalling a party line that they either didn’t believe or didn’t understand.

I will let the readers decide which element of the visiting group was responsible for the lack of belief in the spin and an understanding of the capability gap they have created. :ugh:


DFM over & out

[The B Word]

DFM

The problem in your argument that the current Govt created this "capability gap" is that it was created by Nu-Labour with the scrapping MR2. The Tories merely extended an existing "gap"; so they never technically created the "gap" in the first place.

As would be suggested by Sir Humphrey...

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2006/12/YesMinis_228x318.jpg

[Foxed Moth]

Fergineer: Yes MZ is larger than several European nations but it has a small population.
However, if the RAF were to have as many maritime patrol aricraft per capita as the RNZAF then they would have needed a fleet of around 85 Nimrods!

XV277: My remarks about the Minister of Defence applied to the New Zealand office holder, not his counterpart in Whitehall!

While I am here, three observations on this thread — getting to the facts and the length of the Nimrod's heritage.

First, A lot of people still rely on the general media and the general media both in NZ and the UK is to factual news as a length of seaweed is to weather forecasting.
Most of the media would not know their Nimrod from their AWACS E-3.
They are paid to find sensation ... the truth is a distant objective.

Second, a number of people have looked askance at the long list of things 'wrong' with Nimrod.

This is like finding bacteria on a kitchen table ... the table can be made clean.
Things marked as faulty get fixed, even when there are hundreds of them.
The critical point is less that there were so many faults found but rather that they were found because once found they would be fixed

And, not least some have used the length of the hapless Nimrod's heritage to condemn it.
In a month or two the B-52's lineage will be 59 years long ... obviously it is a hopelessly old aeroplane.

[DFM]

T B W

I think Sir Humphrey’s term for the early withdrawal of the MR2 prior to the planned introduction of the MRA4 was a “capability holiday”.

Although I suppose you could argue that this is no longer a holiday or gap…….it’s now officially a loss of capability!

DFM over & out

[tucumseh]

DFM

Agree, but;


Clearly nobody would put an aircraft into service that is unsafe to fly


Oh yes they would, and did.


You never forget standing toe to toe with a 2 Star advising him (strongly) that an aircraft fleet should be made safe, and him laughing in your face.

And then your precise words appearing in BoI recommendations after lives have been lost.

[DFM]

Tucumseh,


Which aircraft entered into service unsafe to fly?


DFM over & out

[tucumseh]

DFM

See PM.

[hanfimar]

For the record, and for those who may still be interested, I received the following letter from No10 today:

Dear (Hanfimar),

I am writing on behalf of the Prime Minister to thank you for contacting him.

Mr Cameron is most grateful for the time and trouble you have taken to get in touch and informing him of your views.

I am sorry that you have not yet had a response from the Ministry of Defence to your letter of 22 October, but I am forwarding your latest correspondence to them so that they are aware of your concerns, and so that they may reply to you directly.

Thank you, once again, for writing.

Yours sincerely,
etc,(Direct Communications Unit)


Good, it's nice to know that everything is in hand, and will be dealt with in a timely and efficient manner.....

Hanfimar.

[manccowboy]

These letters make interesting reading.
The decision to destroy the new Nimrod was based on inaccurate information - Telegraph (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/letters/8291558/The-decision-to-destroy-the-new-Nimrod-was-based-on-inaccurate-information.html)

[Biggus]

....especially the comment by "nesher".....!?

Which was...

I too worked at woodford until recent years. Let's face it the initial decision to convert existing aircraft was bad enough. The decision to do it at Woodford was nothing short of a disaster.
Any talent that was there in the latter years was purged out, deemed by our Dr Summerfield as being too old, if over 50..
The workforce left after the 2002 redundany was ' The Boys'. Many of whom being totally incompetent or damn right bone idle.
Please don't blame the government. you can only blame Woodford for a grossly overspent budget & time slippage, making it outdated before it would have been delivered. It was no good throwing good money after bad, It needed to stop.
I have witnessed the workmanship on aircraft in the later year at Woodford fist hand, it was nothing short of attrocious

[RumPunch]

I read with interest the comments regarding Aircrew being kept in other jobs to keep the experience. I am 100% fully supportive of that but in reality when a new replacement Nimrod turns up in say 2018 or so are we expected to recall these guys who have settled elsewhere, found a great career possibly and do not wish to return to maratime. I fear it is the final chapter on the horizon , I hope not though :(

[Lima Juliet]

Biggus

Also an interesting thread by "toomanyairmiles"

These were 1940's coach built air frames, every single part required for the aircraft would have required designing and hand building for each airframe meaning the running costs would sky-rocket once in service.

The final space shuttle Endeavour would have cost 1.75 billion in today's money - the single serviceable MRA4 cost twice that.

Worse still the craft would come equipped with vastly out of date equipment specified in the 1990's which would soon require updating.

As for the other arguments about the economic benefits of building the aircraft here they appear to be at best slight. The combat computers were by Boeing, the electronic warfare equipment from Israel, weapons American, Rolls Royce engines built in Germany.

As for the special forces coming under threat this is a misnomer, Nimrod MR2s and the R1's (actually a spy plane) are presently being used in Afghanistan and will be unaffected by this decision.

As other commenters have pointed out India is presently buying the Boeing 737 P8 for 160 million each and these have better kit on-board - the real scandal here is that the project wasn't cancelled sooner. Serious questions remain about MOD procurement.

[baffman]

...As for the special forces coming under threat this is a misnomer, Nimrod MR2s and the R1's (actually a spy plane) are presently being used in Afghanistan and will be unaffected by this decision...Aye, right.

[camelspyyder]

Come on Mate

If it wasn't for all the mis-informed sh*te on here, would any of us come back and read it, It's all very entertaining really!!:)

CS

[Duncan D'Sorderlee]

LJ posted a quote suggesting that the kit on board the P-8A is better than that in the MRA4. Well, it is now; however, I'm not convinced. I am certain that 'our' acoustic suite was better; not sure about the rest of it.

Duncs:ok:

[tramps]

really annoyed: what part of '**** off' don't you understand:ok:

[Kitbag]

Tramps, it's easy:

Really annoyed This user is on your Ignore List. Try it.

[Sgt.Slabber]

BBC News - RAF Kinloss to close as operational air base after July (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-north-east-orkney-shetland-12492509)


RAF Kinloss to close as operational air base after July

RAF Kinloss in Moray will cease to exist as an operational air base after 31 July.
The runway will be closed and air traffic controllers, firefighters and some ground staff will be transferred to other facilities after that date.
It is a result of the cancellation of new Nimrod orders last year after a review.
The Ministry of Defence has suggested that Kinloss may still have a future as a military establishment.
This centres on thousands of British troops being withdrawn from bases in Germany, but no decisions have yet been made.
The future of neighbouring RAF Lossiemouth remains uncertain.
A decision on RAF Lossiemouth, and that of RAF Leuchars in Fife, will be announced after the Scottish elections on 5 May.
An MoD spokeswoman said: "The airfield at Kinloss will cease to function on 31 July. The rest of the base will stay open and the gradual drawdown of staff will take place over a few years, completing in 2014.
"There may still be an alternative military use for RAF Kinloss."
'Devastating effect'
Moray MP and SNP defence spokesman Angus Robertson said: "The closure of RAF Kinloss will be a very sad day for the servicemen and women, the civilian staff and the local community.
"Speculation about the future use of the RAF Kinloss, combined with the uncertainty over the future of RAF Lossiemouth, is having a devastating effect on Moray."
A conference aimed at creating new jobs in Moray amid fears over the future of the RAF in the area was held on Wednesday.
It was organised by Moray Chamber of Commerce.


I take it that those at Kinloss were told before it was reported by the BBC? :\

[hanfimar]

It has been requested that should I receive a reply to my open letter to the Prime Minister, on the cancellation of Nimrod MRA4, that it be posted here.

My original letter was dated October 22nd 2010. It was passed by No 10 to the MOD, for reply, on 22nd November 2010

I post the reply, received today as written and without comment:




From: Defence Business Improvement Division



***********************



MINISTRY OF DEFENCE



*********************************************




14 February 2011



Dear ,

Thank you for your letter of 22 October to the Prime Minister, and your subsequent e-mail expressing your concerns about the cancellation of Nimrod MRA4. I have been asked to reply on his behalf, I am sorry for the delay in doing so.

The Strategic Defence and Security Review (SDSR) brought defence plans, commitments and resources into balance. Tough decisions had to be made to provide the Armed Forces with the sound long term policy and financial basis they require, against the background of the severe financial pressures faced by the nation. These decisions had to be made if resources were to be focussed where they are most needed now, to deliver success in Afghanistan, and at the same time be prepared to meet future challenges.

Some of the most difficult of these decisions related to the RAF’s force structure, where it was simply not possible to continue with all the planned programmes. As a consequence, the Government concluded that, amongst other decisions, the Nimrod MRA4 would not be brought into service, owing to the military tasks to which it was designed to contribute, the amount of public money that had been spent on it, and the impact of such a decision on the people who have dedicated their careers to delivering this capability, or who depend on it for their livelihoods. We have had to prioritise those capabilities that we could continue to maintain. The future support costs of the aircraft also contributed to the decision not to bring the aircraft into service, despite the advanced state of the project.

Since the withdrawal of the Nimrod MR2 in March last year, the Ministry of Defence has sought to mitigate the gap in capability through the use of other military assets, including Type 23 Frigates, Merlin Anti Submarine Warfare helicopters and Hercules C-130 aircraft, and by relying, where appropriate, on assistance from allies and partners. We now need to develop a longer-term plan to mitigate the impact of cancellation on our continuing military tasks and capabilities, and we are doing so. In view of the sensitive and classified nature of some of these military tasks, and the implications for the protection of our armed forces, including the nuclear deterrent, it is not possible for us to comment on these measures in detail.

The decisions taken in the SDSR were fundamentally, and necessarily, about military capability, but we are very conscious that there are implications for the local communities where these aircraft, and the people who fly and support them, are based. We are now taking forward work to analyse the basing and estate consequences of the SDSR in their entirety and develop a way forward. You are no doubt aware that the SDSR announced that RAF Kinloss and two other bases will no longer be required by the RAF, but I should emphasise that no decision has been made to close RAF Kinloss. The work now being taken forward goes far beyond those bases: for example, the rebasing in the UK of forces currently in Germany is being accelerated; and greater efficiencies need to be made through broader estate rationalisation. This is inevitably a complex piece of work going beyond the bases directly affected by the SDSR. It means that it is still too early for decisions to be made, including on what will happen to RAF Kinloss. It takes time to perform the necessary analyses and it is unlikely that any decisions on basing will be taken before the purdah period for the elections in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland. We are concentrating on reaching the right, rather than a rushed, conclusion.

We do understand the uncertainty and concern this causes in Moray, as it does elsewhere in the country with ties to the Royal Air Force. But these are important decisions and we must get them right to ensure that the UK develops the sustainable forces it will require for the future.

The SDSR said that the armed forces will be continued to be based in a way which is sensitive to economic and social pressures and the needs of Defence, MOD personnel, and their families. We recognise how much the people of Moray have done to support the servicemen and their families who have been based in Moray over the years, and I know this support continues to be appreciated by all who are currently at the two bases. It is the job of Defence Ministers, however, to ensure that our use of the defence estate makes sound military sense and provides value for money to the taxpayer. Final decisions will be objective, based on military advice, detailed investment appraisals and wider impact assessments. If there are any other implications, for example regional economic, employment, or social consequences, then Ministers have said that they will be taken into account by the Government as a whole.

We are being as open as we can be during the process in order to minimise uncertainty both for our own personnel and for the communities affected. We are working with the relevant agencies and the local communities to manage the local impact of our decisions.

I know this is a matter of real concern to you, as well as to others in Moray, and I can assure you it is one we are taking very seriously indeed.

Yours sincerely



********************

[AnglianAV8R]

Well, that contains an admission

"We now need to develop a longer-term plan to mitigate the impact of cancellation on our continuing military tasks and capabilities"

Irrespective of the rights and wrongs of the decision to cull nine airframes without an alternative being immediately available, they confirm the serious capability shortfall. It is interestuing to note the implications for our nuclear deterrent are acknowledged.

What a disgraceful mess.

[davejb]

Actually I'd say it says nothing of substance whatsoever -
like pretty well everything that comes out from any level of government these days (and to be fair, in the past too) there is nothing of substance in that reply at all... at best it could be described as 'a bit aspirational'.

It was a difficult process (SDSR) where we needed to balance conflicting pressures - no indication of, for example, basing the decisions on defence on anything to actually do with defence.

Quite a lot on Moray - well, I live here and, in the ideal world I'd prefer substantial RAF presence here still as I have a lot of time and money invested locally... on a personal level I'd like to know that my property won't devalue to pauperise me as I approach retirement, as otherwise I might as well have partied rather more in preceding decades. The lack of MPA capability still bothers me, even if Kinloss had closed and St Mawgan was still on the go.

The decisions taken in the SDSR were fundamentally, and necessarily, about military capability,

Was there ever a bigger porkie told? At this point the lights are flashing red and the alarm is going 'whup whup'.

Ah, I can't be bothered - this reply is a sop, they haven't even had the decency to register that they are replying to someone who knows about defence, and who should therefore not be fobbed off with inconsequential verbiage. That really annoys me - when 'they' are replying to people who have some knowledge of the subject matter 'they' still give the same reply they'd give to Jordan.

Dave

[baffman]

I take it that those at Kinloss were told before it was reported by the BBC?

Doesnt directly answer your question, but the dates quoted in the BBC article had already been up on the Station's public homepage for some time.

RAF Kinloss - RAF Station Homepage (http://www.raf.mod.uk/rafkinloss/)

[tramps]

Quote from the RAF Air Power Review Autumn/Winter 2010
"The ability to project power from the air and space to influence the behavior of people or the course of events".
“In today’s world, it is a regrettable fact that there are many conflicts and fragile cease-fires waiting to explode into fighting, not just in the Gulf area but in Asia, Africa, and even within Europe. The RAF must be ready to deliver flexible air power anywhere in the world.”
[/CENTER]AGILE ADAPTABLE CAPABLE:)

So......no Harriers, no Nimrods, no money:eek:, an aging Transport and SH fleet, the SARF in disarray, people worked to the bone and an announcement on redundancies’; priceless... well to all those many who are contemplating conflicts and those fragile cease-fires waiting to explode into fighting, not just in the Gulf area but in Asia, Africa, and even within Europe, (and let’s not forget the Falkland Islands)
Well at least we still have the Royal Navy
Rule Britannia! (http://www.britannia.com/rulebrit.html)
Mr Cameron, Mr Fox and Co. Get a grip and fast:}

[Duncan D'Sorderlee]

That was the first time in this sorry mess, that the Service and civilian personnel knew something before the BBC!

Duncs:ok:

[GOLF_BRAVO_ZULU]

hanfimar. In all fairness, it must have taken MoD a fair while to copy and paste that letter together from various Press releases.

the Ministry of Defence has sought to mitigate the gap in capability through the use of other military assets, including Type 23 Frigates, Merlin Anti Submarine Warfare helicopters and Hercules C-130 aircraft

Are those the same T23s that will be covering the gaps left by the wirhdrawn T22s? the ASW Merlins that are already overstretched on training and deployment at sea? the Hercs that have excellent radios, MK1 eyeballs and cameras but are already tied up on active Ops?

the Government concluded that, amongst other decisions, the Nimrod MRA4 would not be brought into service, owing to the military tasks to which it was designed to contribute, the amount of public money that had been spent on it, and the impact of such a decision on the people who have dedicated their careers to delivering this capability, or who depend on it for their livelihoods.

I have read that sentence several times, juggled the punctuation and tried to second guess any typos and still can't make sense of it. I suppose if you write a sentence of sufficient length, it can mean anything you want.

[GrahamO]

have read that sentence several times, juggled the punctuation and tried to second guess any typos and still can't make sense of it. I suppose if you write a sentence of sufficient length, it can mean anything you want.Its pretty clear although admittedly, not crystal clear. It means (IMO);

the Government concluded that, amongst other decisions, the Nimrod MRA4 would not be brought into service, owing to the military tasks to which it was designed to contribute .......... the task it may be able to do should it ever enter service are either able to be done in a more cost effective way, or do are not a high enough priority to warrant the cancellation of something else.

the amount of public money that had been spent on it, Debated enough ....... historically a money pit and not using gamblers logic to finish it "honest guv, if I can just spend a little more it will all be finished"

and the impact of such a decision on the people who have dedicated their careers to delivering this capability ...... too few crew/pilots/groundstaff affected compared to the removal of another platform i.e. its too niche.

or who depend on it for their livelihoods....... and consequently less families and businesses depend upon its existence for their livelihood.

At least thats how I read it - a slam dunk decision compared with the cancellation of Tornado for example.

If MRA4 were not cancelled, and the RAF had to give up assets to save the equivalent monies, what would people cancel instead ?

[ShortFatOne]

"too few crew/pilots/groundstaff affected compared to the removal of another platform i.e. its too niche."

If a platform that would have contributed directly to 7 of the re-written Military Tasks and in-directly to the other 2; had the capacity for expansion in pretty much any direction defence wanted to go and was entering service with the RAF this year, as opposed to about 6 or so years for any potential future replacement is too niche, then I would suggest that, on that premise, C130J, Tristar, VC10, GR4, Typhoon and anything else we might have left should have also been axed.

[GrahamO]

ShortfatOne - I didn't say I understood the economics of all the statements - merely that the original statement did make sense from the point of view of readable English :D

My reference to "niche" refers to the impact of £ per cancellation which I cannot comment on, but all that is needed to save X is one platform then thats all that should be cancelled. The debate is then about which one ......

I'm afraid you are falling towards gamblers logic again - suggesting that if money was continued to be spent on it, it could do anything - but this in only true if it were possible for the MRA4 to actually stick to time and cost and specification, which sadly it has a decade of proving that it is incapable of doing.

Nobody with a cheque book would bet money on the MRA4 ever sticking to a budget. Its a money pit. Nobody on the project has ever made an estimate and stuck to it.

If you took on a builder and 10 years later he still hadn't finished the original building and kept coming back for more money every year to make it the best-est super-est uber house extension, and breaks every cost and time estimate along the way, I submit that you would not give them any money.

Nimrod is no different to a dodgy builder in that regard.

[RumPunch]

GrahamO nobody batted an eyelid when Typhoon became over budget, in fact Typhoon is the most expensive over budget aircraft the UK has had. A400m, JSF all well over the initial quoted price.

[Biggus]

Rum,

While your statement about other projects being over budget may be correct, you have to go beyond that to look at reasons why and the impact resulting...

A400M - result of cost overruns = less aircraft ordered per customer.

JSF - possible result of cost overruns = total cancellation of project or reduced orders per customer.

Typhoon - one major reason for coming in over budget (and late) being that it was a multinational co-operation project, and for several years the Germans said "we have no money this year, cancel the project if you want, otherwise come back and ask agin next year". The project continued on the back burner, producing both time delays and eventual cost overruns...

[TorqueOfTheDevil]

If MRA4 were not cancelled, and the RAF had to give up assets to save the equivalent monies, what would people cancel instead ?


Puma for a start!

[GrahamO]

GrahamO nobody batted an eyelid when Typhoon became over budget, in fact Typhoon is the most expensive over budget aircraft the UK has had. A400m, JSF all well over the initial quoted price

Agreed, but as we all one realise, two, three, four or even five 'wrongs' do not make the sixth right. The Armed Forces have to start living within a Budget somewhere and it would appear that Nimrod is a start. As I have posted earlier, it is by no means certain that the axe has been put away and further Programmes may yet suffer.

As to the point about Puma going first, isn't that used to ferry ground forces who are suffering huge losses if they go by road ?

Cancelling Puma could be interpreted as 'guys on the ground continue to die as RAF opt to keep non-working, massively overbudget, years late project alive rather than save lives'.

Grossly unfair characterisation I am sure, but who would want to explain how essential the MRA4 is to an infantrymans widow, when a Puma could have saved their life, as MRA4 would have had negligible effect on ground movement safety.

Nobody would want to make that call.

[Biggus]

GO,

I suggest you do some research on where Pumas are, and more importantly aren't, operating - then you can destroy your own arguement rather than have someone do it for you!

[davejb]

RAF News, March 2010

In addition, should the Puma be deployed on operations in Afghanistan in the future then the Puma Force will be ready-prepared for the challenges there.”



A quote from the article explaining what they were doing in Kenya....

Biggus, if you are going to spend your time insisting on factual content, then none of these endless round-in-circles arguments is ever going to finish.....

Dave

[DFM]

So...for all of you who think the demise of the MRA4 was not about politics......and before anyone says otherwise, it is clear that CAS did not want to lose the capability; therefore, it is also clear that this was a purely political decision.

Moving on; Ensure RAF Kinloss is linked exclusively with MRA4 so that the Govt can close the base irrespective of the viability of the real estate....in the process, let us not consider if UK PLC could place several FJ Sqns in there.......and as a bonus.......upset the locals and Scotland in general.....then suggest Lossie might (potentially) be next....wait and see if SNP increase their vote in the May elections,.......if they do........it must mean that Scotland is officially a lost cause for the Tories, Labour and LD.......next...... how about a vote on independence so that we can ensure Scotland does not influence the make up of the Govt at Westminster for the forseeable future.......

So who thinks Lossie or Leuchars will survive now........come on......balls on the line?............1 or both bases to close :confused:

DFM over & out

[Siggie]

Hmm, Old Course Lossie or Old Course St. Andrews? Going to be a tough call.

[Wensleydale]

Yawn...

MRA4 would have moved to Waddington anyway......

[tonker]

Just before independence.

[cazatou]

DFM

I think you will find that the demise of MRA4 was the result of the incoming Government becoming aware of the true state of the Nations finances coupled with the knowledge that the number of people qualifying for the State Old Age Pension in this financial year and the next is assessed as 1,464,000 people. That large number being the result of the demobilisation of Servicemen after 6 long years of War.

With the Basic State Pension set at £102.15 per week HMG will have to find £149,547,600 per week - or if you prefer £7,776,475,200 per annum -just to meet that obligation.

[Biggus]

Anyone who wasn't wearing maritime tinted spectacles must have questioned the long term viability of Kinloss once the MRA4 order was cut to 9 aircraft.

The idea that the RAF would cram 70 odd aircraft (25 C-130J, 25 A400M, 14FSTA, 6 C-17) into Brize Norton (a situation that no doubt will have its own problems) but be content with all that "real estate" at Kinloss only being used for 9 MRA4 was never going to hold water.

As for Lossie, Leuchars, etc...no doubt the landslide win by the SNP and the prospect on a referendum on Scottish independence was all part of a Tory plot to ensure the demise of the MRA4 and the closure of Kinloss.... :D

[Tallsar]

Perhaps basing our repatriated Reapers and other UAVs at Kinloss may have helped with future justification.....they have to go somewhere relatively safe in terms of min risk to the population.....but then perhaps they'll just be mothballed... :-(

[Kreuger flap]

DFM let it go. The aircraft have been cut up. This is what they look like now.

http://www.theoffside.com/files/2008/10/tesco_value_beans-211x300.jpg

http://www.pprune.org/ GhgVHzAgIycpLSwsFx4xNTAqNSYsLCkBCQoKDgwOGg8PGjUlHyQwKiksKiws LCwsNSkpNCosLDAvLCwvKSwuLCwsMCwsLC81LSwpLCkpLSktLCkpLCwqKf/AABEIAOEA4QMBIgACEQEDEQH/xAAcAAEAAgIDAQAAAAAAAAAAAAAABgcEBQEDCAL/xABQEAACAQMBBAUGCgcDCwQDAQABAgMABBESBQYhMQcTQVFhIjJxkaHBFCNC UmKBkqKx0QgkM2NyssJzgrMlNENUZIOTo9LT4RYXRFN0w/AV/8QAGwEBAAMBAQEBAAAAAAAAAAAAAAECBAMFBwb/xAA0EQACAQIEAQkHBAMAAAAAAAAAAQIDEQQSITFBEyIyUWFxgZHwBRQjUrHB 4TOh0fEVJEL/2gAMAwEAAhEDEQA/AKTpStzu5sITmR5GKQQrrmYYzjsRc/KYjAr1JyUVdlDX2WzZZjiKNnIGTpHId7Hko8TWVLsyKL9tOue1IB1rDwL5Ef qY1LdnXEN3ZyxRxHrCXWKFCRHEmBiaZyQpbzsu5J4cAK0+zt3oiwjhR7+Yed oJjtl9MnnOPHKg9maxSryltoWsdm60VjLIyuOqCrkNOetd+IGEUAID4FXqaG 6tI1GmC4kXh56mCLHfiQxp92tRPALJf1q6W2yP2FgirIR9KXz/AKyfrpsERzlpI7IhBxE9yUkJxnJMk50pj6Kt6a4EjbGi9j6uKGCMDOkw5nYZ Kk+TBCVDHSM4cemtXD0Zt2i5PphihH1GaYH7tbra12wYK11eEOMpDZo+GHaV l0IGX0DHjXzb7vSOQybOyc5D3127H0lEIx6KAxl6MEXz1cfx3cKewRN+NdI3 YsVYqXhJBwR8JmkweXHqoRUstd37vHn2UH9ja6z9bORmsyPYFx230v8Au4oE H8poCFybrWnyeq/4e0W9oxXwN1bbvh+uHaQ/qqdf+npO2+vPqkiH4R18jdyUcr+8+tom/FKAgbbsWna1v/xbqL2yIwrN2JZi2LG2kCl8ahHfWj5xnHCaJe8+upU+w73OU2i/okt4m9ZGKw7qz2mP9SuV7njKE+nPD20Bpt4N3pLsK0y3GQeEi28Epxg8CYJs Y9CZ4VE7rcsKcC5iU906TW5PoMiY9tTGC5jV8Xdg1kx5SwytEhPcGQqoPpNb SS2uCGFrdCfABa3vUDNg8vLIDYPYSCD86gIDFu5tKFcw65I/3EqyoR4opPqIrfbH3P8AhUKvKsBkIOqNQ0Ey8SOOjK8gD5UfbWbsy1iLPLLa mwljYKzo+YgW4hmjVgUU9jDhx87nW1vmIYR3Eetj+z4nyyOOILgYeOXGSI3P HGAx51KdgV5tLc4h3SB9ciedA+kTAYzldJKzDHHKHPgOVRoip1v1sshIr6Bz IjMPjDkTKfkByPOwQRqI1AjBJ4Vqd/FHwiNiAsr28TzqBjEzLlsjsJ4E1qo1W3lZVojdKUrWVFKUoBSlKAUpSgFKUo BUu3OcTWt3YghZZgrxZIGpk46Mnt4DH11Ea5jJBBHA5GCDgg54EGuNaOaPcS i0rbYom2dBa2x6vMqC8A4SLwbrOsHPzgAM8OXZUh2xp2fs+Q2yBOrTyf4iQu tvnEZzk88VE9pPfWOk7TtGkwPIuYn0yAdxniyG7PJb21m2+9KXMEiGVnjYFW F1CyEZHEG5hBTOOILKOVeeXO3Z+6MDXvVPmQRRRynrAhaSWUt5TOFDFBjzST xI7BisLa2zX2hLbK8xSKZpSkKgBVgh5N4yMB2jhnhyxWRDLc9VFJGBNcwLpR 7d45kmh59XKgYOOQ4gHBGawrrazjS7QTW7RszoGifMbvxkWNsaZIm4nq30kZ 4NyFAWHZbPSIYRcZ5kksx/ic8W+s1kVBdm9K0J8m5jeI/OCkofHHnD0cakNrvlZyebcxehm0H1Pg0BuaViptWE8poj6JU/OvsX8X/2x/8AET86A76ViPteBec0Q9MqfnWLLvVZrzuoPqlQ/gaA2tKjsm/9n8h3lPdFDK3qJUA+uumXe+dx+rbPuXHY0qiFfWc/jQEnZAQQQCDzBGQfAjtqDXsSolyYCQsMkXwMqc4uG4SQwn5SFsAoMji3dw7X vp5Ri6khizzhW4RRjucx65HHgCv11iXe17eJDLJcOyqxiQWtuUWI48qOJpDh WxzYDV4jlQGRvdd63d+skhSCFklaEgdZLIV02wJ4NjBJ541HxrtuZuu2eltF quJ1jjGqLiiSppIZpj5IwR2Emoi++kI0pbWfWEeYbl2mwe9Yh5OT31IbPcnb e01Al/VYDjg/xS6TzxEg1Nw44bA8aA4uH6iOVnkWYLM83VKcW0cjHUBLLjMxDcREvHVxx2it L65eSR5JSWdmJYnvr0Ftjongh2bcvMzXU8drKIncaEj0p5IjhQ6VwRnJyeJr z1dHLsfpH8a04dJyuQzrpSlbSgpSlAKUpQClKUApSlAK7bVAXUE4BYAnu411 VwarLosk9sCBSmkgMuMYPEFeXHPPhUYvOjCzZzJCr2jsMM1q/VBv4o8FG7ea9prf7Cl1WsDfOhjPrQGs6vLLlG7W/RzkLs9veLkkkCSLRzJPnRnHLuUegV07M6Odq2gZXV7hc8Gt79kbHLAjk8lu/BA9NXxXBFAee7DeZZCEV9oFm81eognJ4Z4aVJPCtj8JTOmaVojjOm5sEiJBz xAZBkcCM1qej86NqWw7pSv3WWpF03L+twH9wfY7fnXpSwcVWVO+jVymbS5jy bIGgSGa0CEAhmsoMEHlxLd1dNrsNZCRFcWjHtCWdqT6gx4fVU1J17teizA+x w91RnoPb9buB3wD2P8A+a4LDrJOV+i7E31NbNs6FHMb3USOCAVWztVYHsBHV Nx4j11mbS2B8GUPPdXMSk4HxESAnGcDTBzwDWm6Qxp2tcH97Gf+XHVg9NPGw iP+0J7Y5T+VdHhYp09ekRm3I9sjYfXwtLbyX1wquUIW5ZDqADHhqThhh29ta HZs0V3OkMNl1kr5AN3csw4Ak51GTsB7Kn3Qi36lMP8AaSfXHEPcar/cHydr24/fOPuSCpjho3qL5dv3F9jt3zt7uwdIQ1tAHQt+qQ6SBkjGtxnPiAKl26PRDYz WsE1x11wXjD6ZZm0B34uVC4IJPjWs6cR+tW/9i384/OrD6PHzsy1P7oD1Ej3VSrSjGhGaWr/JKetjO2NuraWgxbW8UXiiDUfS/nH6zW0xXNYN7tqCE4lmjQkgAM6gkngMLnJrGk3sWPjeJM2lwB2wSj1o1eNpR xH8K+1Qa9obUj1QSjvjcetTXjCfmP4V/lFaMN0mQzrpSlbSgpSlAKUpQClKUApSlAK4rmgoyT2DuM5OzbMnmbWH+Rahn SNvzdWN6iwshjaBG0OgYatcgJyMNyC9tSvo3m1bKsj/ALNGPsrp91V503p+twHvgI9Tn/qrJg4xlVtJXJlsZ2z+nLsntvrik/pce81I7LpesH855Iv44mPtTUK0+7HRnZXdhBK6ukjxgs0cjDLcQTg5HZXF30 GRH9lcyL/HGj/y6ffXeSwjbTuvXiRziAbu3SLtWKTUBGLsnUTgaC7YOT2YINSfpnuo5JLZ45E kGiQHQytjBU8cHhzri46ELkZ0Twt/EJEP4N+NayXof2gvJIm/hlUfiBWvlKMqinn20K2drE22Cwfdthnj8HuB9l5cfhUU6FpsX7jvt29jJ+da pujHaQ/+OT6JIv8Arrp/9udo/wCqyfai/EPUKFPLOOdc7Xh/I100MnpWXG058dqxn7gHuqa9KV/FJsyILIjOJIm0h1LeYwPAHPyqgY6N9on/AOJJ9bw/9ysmDom2g3+hVf4pYx+BNS1S5l5rm9w110N70Sbz29rDcLcTJFl0ZQx4nySD pA4nGByqH7I2tHBtFLgkmNLhnyo4lCWwQDjsPhUkt+ha8PnSQJ/edj7Fx7a3Fr0Fj/SXZ8RHCB95nP8ALVeVw8ZSlm6QsyL9I2+MW0JImhR1EasCX0gnJB4AE45U2Z 0o3Vtax20KxKIwRrZSzcSTyJCjnjkasSx6GrFMF+tlP05MD1IFqQ2G5tnD+z toQR2lAzfabJ9tcZYmgoqCjdImz3KSk3h2pe8FkuZAeyFWVf8AlACtHNayQT hZlKSIylg3nA+Swz9RB+uvUKoAMDgPCvP3StHjadx4hD64k/Ku2FxCqScFFJWIlGx6BcZBHf768VXa4b1+wke6vaiNkA9+D668Z7bj0zOvzX cep3FeZh+kdGYNKUrcUFKUoBSlKAUpSgFKUoBQUpQHqrodm1bGtD3I4+zLIv uqJdOafHWp/dyj70dSDoMudWxoR8x5l/5jP/XWn6dI/wDNW/tR/IfdWXB6V14lpbEv6MXzsu28FYep3FSmod0SvnZcXg0g++x99TDNcK+lSXeyV sc4rg0zTNciSNbx7SubdoykkWiWdIlDQsSocHiWEg1cR3DnWLf7euormO3Zo yWhZy6W0r+UHKjyFfIGnGTnAI8ayN7HmZkSOxa6VGWQN8IihAkXOnAZgWxk8 +HGsPb6ytJFJ8AnllEeGMN0IlQMc6A+pdficY5c6q6M30Xv2+rHo0sTRSiqk eDvzVvw/P3Pva23rmKUrJrijWNCJYrVpkZsfGFvKyig8hzx2192G2Jby4liSfq44kjOY kQvIZEDa/jAwVOPAAZ4jjWJtGxnVEWOynlLJ8Yo2iUjA44VizgyNgnJxjxNfe1tjzusOi wtWkEYDF5iERRwWNSihnwOeQB3ZqORqN7rzL+84bLbLra18q7NbPdvXjpe6s fMW0DLc3EU908SQIgQpIsRcFfKmZh5xzjgOAzyrd7lXcstmjzEsxLYZhgsgJ 0MfSO3t51rNobv3bxQpGtgjovlO0JcL81IlbOAPnE8e4VI9lwPHEoml61wPK fSqDPgq8ABUqk485vr6zjXxMKkMkI226uCs7W+bd/czaVrrveK2i/aTxL6XXPqzWjvekuyTzXaQ/u0b8WwKh1IrdnKnhK9XoQb8GS2qD6X0xtOTxiiP3SPdV47KvhPDHKoIEiKwB 5gMM4NUt00R42gD3wJ7C4r0vZ7+L4GSrFxunui59kS6reJu+JD61BryTvnDp vrpe65uB6pnFert2D+pW3/AOPD/hrXlvpFTG0rsf7VOftSM3vrjS0qPxJexG6UpW0oKUpQClKUApSlAKUpQClKC gPR/wCj3JnZTD5tzIPuxn318dOi/FWp7pX9qj8qxv0dHPwK4U9lwD9qNDWy6b482kLd0+PWjflWTDaYhd7LS2M/obfOzQO6aQe0H31h9LrsvwZlYqcyDKkg/I7R9ddnQm+bBx3XD+1UNcdMC/EwH94w9a591ZfaC50+89b2K/8Acp+P0ZA7fei7TzbmYemRmHqbIrOg3/vgeE5bwZIz/TUdrlWIIIOCDkEdhHIjxrxVOS4n0CeEoT6UE+9IlidJt8pwTGT4xYOfqNdq9 Kd53RH/AHZ9zVto7qIxHa/DrRD1ZXn+tcED93m44dxrD2bLcLYQvs9dcjO/wllRHk154AhgfJI93jWjn/N2+B4VsK1+hFa5XfRKWrettlwfFs42bv3tC5lEUXUhmBIymBgDJ4k+Fa6TpF vyM61UZxkRLjPdk541LJlcbR2c0qqsjQOrheQYKxYD6zUdtdlvd7PaCDDSxX jsyFlU9WVZdQycYyfYal59sz9WIpPCu0nSio83qdruabv1aLq3MCfeTaTusZ knDuAVVV0FgeRUBQSDg8a69tbBv0jMtwJCvyiZden+IBjipVPtKK1v7czMpA sliZ1OpUcEgk4444Ed/H01ibW27DDbTRxtbF5hpC2qNxBzlpHY8Tgnhzz21VxVnmkdIYialDkaSSdto 762eq2steJX9Kz7XYFxL+zglbxCNj1kYreWfRnevzRIx9Nx+C5NcFCUtkezV xlCl05peK+hZW48mbC3/swPUSPdVYdNyfrsR77cex2/OrX3X2U1taxwuwZkBBK5xxZjwzx7arHpxT9Ztz3xMPU3/mv0ns66qRT6j5jjJRlVnKOzbt3XLH3Kl1bPtT+4QeoY91ebeliHTta78ZifW kbf1V6J6OD/AJLtP7IfiaoDpmTG17nxdT64YfyNRHSs+9nDgQalKVsKilKUApSlAKUpQClK UApSlAX3+jlL8Tdr9OI+tWX+mpF01LmwTwuE/lkFRP8ARxf/ADsfQhP37ge6pp0wx52ax7pYz7SPfWOlpiF3lnsa7oOkzazjunHtRfyqxZoQ wwwDDuIBHqNVl0Fv8VdD95GfWrD3VaNMWvjSJg9Eaq43YtX863hP+7UH1gZr Al6PbFv9AB/Czr+BqE3e8G1W2ldW9nIHEbEiNxFgJ5PmlgCeJ763G6u/V18LWy2jCIpXXMbAYyQCcEAlSCA2CDzXHopPB6X0el7cbGiGMrw0jOS8WbOT owszwAlUdwlYjP8AezXFv0ZW8ZzHLcxkjB0TBeHdkLk1qN4+kq5gvprWG1E3 V6SNPWFiDHG5JCg8i+M+isjdjpDubm6jglsmiV9WXPWgLpR2HBkA4lQOfbVP cWo58qta/A7f5PFbco/qZ7dGVsSC0lycZxmbOM88HTwr7i6MbIcSjt/FK/uxWTv5vYdn2wlVQ7tIEVWJA45JJx3AGsndDeIXtpHPgKxyHUHIV1JBH4H0EV y92WTPl02J/wAlituUfmdcG41knK3j/vAt+JraW2zIo/2ccafwIq/gKgMPSPIm2JLScoIOsMaELgqxA0FmzxGTpPpB7Kzd5trTR7YsIlkdYZB5SA4 VmzIPKHbzX1Cu6wri7WS0uZp4mrU6cm+9sm1xdJGuqRlRRzLEAes112O1Ipg TDIkgBwSjK2D445VVe8vVXu2Xt72fqbeBBoBYIGYrGxGpuAZtZOeeEAFbzc/cT4LftPbTo1qUK6Q+tzkA4Yr5PBhkE8cV0dGMYXk9bX208zhcsKqi6dE+MtT 9GUe1DVu1VfTonkWp+lKPYhqcE/jR8foJbEq6MJdWy7fwDD1Owqj+nOLG1pj3pCfWhH9NXR0SH/JcX8c3+K9U/wBPS42o/jFAfUJRUPTEPvY4FaUpSthUUpSgFKUoBSlKAUpSgFKUoC6P0crj465XvhjI/uySf9dWN0rpnZc/g0R/5sdVZ+jxJi9kHfayH7MsI/qq2+ktM7LufBAfsup91Yo6V13otwIb0FScbpfCE/4gq2ap3oNf4+5HfGh9TN+dXFVsavjPw+gjsUztS6u4du3RsUWSUoCVYZzGVi LHGocclfXXOztpTTbZtn2mvwZ0GIl6tlVm8rSNRJ5lzxzzwOGay9472ex21L eLbSTI0QXIVwpykWcMFIyClaneDeeTa9xaRQ27xvG55nJ8opknAGlVCZya3R Tkk7K2XWXFaFTO3j221jt6WZIjMWiXyBkEgxoCeAJ4aO6pLuv0nNd3SW7Wrw lw3lFyQNKlvNKDnjvrR72bajs94I55NWhbZdWgZbyhMowCR26akll0s2UrpG pl1OwUZjxxYgDJz3muFSOaEXkvzVrqSt9zVdIJ+FbTsLIjUobrJB2EE5IP9y Nx/fr46Npfgl9ebPc4w5kjB7hjOPSjRn0A1prnYkm1dr3fVzGIQ+SHAPAL8XpGC OZEh58gax9sbuvsW7tbozmZTIdbMunAAAZSSxzlGb1V0UYuCo31tt27kcbnx vPu2bnam0ETPWJH1yAfKKiPUvpKk48QK7It5/hdxsiRiDMk3VS95IeIKxH0lfPp1d1SXZrZ3lnI4g2owRyPk25HGtNtvcWWDa 8MttC7wtPHLlFysZEgMitjgozkjwOOyrRqRdoy+W68rNCxIt5t1bDaN20YmK XaJ8YI8HyVwBrBGMjUo55x6Ki2z9gSbK2xaxRS9YJsagF0nq2LKQ6gkHGCwP 0a3m/m6Ti7W8tbqK2lfCnrJeqywAXKNg5yMArjsFfW4O7QF21xcSyXNwNa6+rl6pW U6HHWuAJHHlL5IwADXKE8tLpXVtu3+CeJZIqs+nKP4i3PdKw9af8AirNqu+m 2PNlEe64X2pJ+VZcI7Voky2Mvockzs0D5s0g9ZDf1VV/6QsWNooe+1Q+qSRasfoTb9Qk8Ll/8OI++oD+kQn67C3fa49UrH31eppiH3hbFRUpStRUUpSgFKUoBSlKAUpSgFKU oC0P0f58bSI+dbzKPtQt/TV3b/pnZl2P3D+wZ91ef+g6UjbEI7Ck3+Gx/pr0TvbFqsbod8En8prFLSt4ovwKs6En/AFyYd8H4On51dNUZ0LyY2g3jA/8AMhq8s11x6+N4IiGxDN7luxcD4M0i5W3AI1mPUJn1BwOGCGXUfmjwrm32pc SbOuLjU0M0b3LDUkZIWNnKRMCMEAaVzz4c6mVcMgIwRkHmDx4Vn5TRK2xNiu trXfGR7hbWXqIYXInt4y86ykk6WJ8gDzFwD5QOedYWz9pQ/Cki+BWaMt3IrMsCriBWKwyA8g+tWB/gPKrKm2dE7KzxozJ5hZFJX+EkcPqrrfYcBJJhjJPM6Fz5zNzx85mPpY99dFX ja1iLEC2VvN8TPLapaW7iSNmCQA64Zn0RMxV1+MXU5bn9Wa2Um3JutxK8L9X dxW5hMQDvrVMzLlyVPlswABGlCMnialzbKhOAYkOFCDKjggIIUfRBVTjwFdh sYzJ1mhOsAwH0jVju1c8VDqxb2JsRDaO3ZIto6eszHlR1UegMFMRJLxtHqdc jV1iPhcBcZ54NjNfFVMsU7YnhuRxUnq3JWWEeVgBdQKoxzjPDhVh6aYqqqpK 2XqFiC7N3cuVVWEcJMkbqROQxh1XEswOkAiQlXXKgjii8e7c7C3VNvPJLrjI d5W4QgSYkfXhpixJAPYAB6a291tGOMMXdV0AauPEZ4LkDjxPLvrFvN4oY01B w56suiIQXdQpYaV5nKg1SVdu9zpGjOWyZtagXTOmdnA908f4OPfW3stuSzPG YmVlJBfTGSoTGT5ZI8rs44OfknswelyPOy5D3PEfvge+pwsk6sX2omvRlS0l uanoPl/VZ17pgfWi/9NRb9I6D420fvjmH2WiP9VSDoLbyLofTi9qv+Vaj9JBcLZN2frC/W3UEfymtGI0xD70cVsUZSlK0lRSlKAUpSgFKUoBSlKAUpSgJx0LT6ds230us HrikHvr0vtxc20474ZP5TXlTo2u+r2rZt+/Vft+R/VXrK+TMTjvRh6waw1tKhdbFF9Dr42kg74pB7AfdV8ivP/RW2NqQeiQfcb8quzebbgs7WS4ZS2gcFBxliQFGewZI41px8W6yS4pFYbGr2v voyXBtbW2kupkAMgUhETPEBnbhnGD9dfH/AK7aH/PbS4thkZkCiaEA8iZI848eHCoFuf0ntHcztPCZPhDh/iFy4cKFCgE5ZNI4DmDnvNTWXf8AZNL3FlPFBLhY2cJnVkhuuUkdUpGCNXYGJ qk8O4PLl8b6+H9E3M2934UyCOzhe+bALdQyCNAwyuqVjpBI44zWHt7ae1NCt DbLEoOZMOk82nt0RgBSQMnAJJ4VGdmb4W1ltGVbZC9tcdWcQYYLcnIIj+SQc gEA4yeHCpa+9s8fWvc2E8cCgaWTq5W0/KMiI509/DOBzqHTyNWj57+Vxe5rtn3l1dKz2e0klaM4aKazWPDY4BuTqD34+vhW53c3r MsjWt1H1F3GoLRg6lZTjy42HMceXMeNRDYKptHaMj20zwRQRKmqPCyyo5YhS GXAVMFAcFgFXjk5qU3W7mzYFRZxCpVNKvPLiTTkn9ozBvOZuIPbilVRXNkte xarv2uESrNaPfCzmltzHAM5DavL0EgKSqjhxy2nI4cMjPGoFta9i2cDc7P2g JhrANq84mQhuB04bIxzz4c+w7nd7pVRo0N8nwcyAmOQAtE+klWxjLIwPDBzz HHiK5TwspRvHVeT8jrSrclNTS1Wupszu/M80kgiiiIZWQ6shisgkYuFGo62zxJ4ALw5197L3Tkhmi8v4uPQx4jypFhaE4 XTlRxHyjy8eEjsr5Jo1kiZXRhlWU5BFZFY+SSZqeOquLjwat9uPrU4FRTpTT Oy7jw0H1SLUsqN9IsedmXQ/dZ9RB91aaLtUj3owvYhPQXLxul8Ij/OPfXX+kfD+qWrd07D7SMf6a6ug1v1i5H7pP5jWx/SITOzYj3XSfySCtOL0xD8CI7HnSlKVoKilKUApSlAKUpQClKUApSlAbTdSUL fWrHgBcwk+gSLmvZBrxRazaHRvmsp9RBr2sDWHEdIujzz0dtp2rb/ANo49aOKvDerYnwu0lt86S68D2BgQVJ8MgVR+7I0bYhHddlfvMtehsVqxzaq RkuorHYpTovuY7K+liux1UxXQmvsbPlJnkC3k4PI9/Gpftbf9oh1s0Rt4CPIilVTczHOCOryVij4HLNk93OpLvJuvBexGOdMn5LjAd T3q3u5Htqt7roOl1fF3UZX6cbBvukioVSjWlnqOz9bCzWxo94ekYXFqbWO1i giLKV0nzdLauAAAz4+NSXd7pCnls44w6iWKT4+aQalS0QajLJ4njH3k+nNTD dLcKCxiK4Esjj4yRlHEfNAOdKeHb2+Ehgs0TzEVM89Kqv4Cq1K9G2WMdL3CT Kh3M2bs67nmZyVkkuJeqRJWh0Qk6kxpYFs8sDOO4VOz0e2CkyyRayoyXnlkf AXvLtjA8eFdm8nR5aXra5EZJOHxkZCscfOBBVu7JGfGoqOhBMkG7l0H5IjXO OzJ1YP2al1Yz1zuPZv9Ba3Awd/79JIpIl6mbrHiazS2UM6RqMyyNoGRqzpwfE44VEdlblXUoDSq1vbrxeS41Ro q/KKq3Ek45AceFWdY9EEEJ1RXN1HJjGtHjU4PMcE7eHqra23RxaK4klEly4+Vc ytLy5ZU4X2V1jioU45Yv8AYZbmJ0X7P6u2kZC/USTu0CuCGEQOFY5+djPq76mlcKuBgcAK5rzak88nIuhWj33TOz7ofuH9gzW8 zWl3wvI0s5xI6JqhkUamAySpAAzzOcUp9Nd5DKw6EJcXky98H4Ov51IOn5P8 lZ+bcRH+Ye+ot0LN/lEjvt5PY0VTHp1h1bHlPzZIj98D31rx363kVjseY6UpWggUpSgFKUoBSlKAU pSgFKUoDg17O2Fd9ZawSH5cMbfaRT768YmvYW48urZtmeWbWH2Io91Y8Tuiy KMv7o2u1ZJCpPVXjvp80lRKWGCRwyO3xq09m9MllJgSdZCfppqHrTP4VKds7 uW90um4iSTuJGGH8Ljyh9Rqv9s9CCnLWs5XuSYah9teI9RrTy1Cukql01xIs 1sT/Z+81rP+yuIn8BIur61JyPrFbKvO22ejq9tlLyQ6kUEl42V1AHMn5QHpFamz2 9cQ/sp5Y/4ZHA9GM4qfcIzV6c7jP1np8V9V54tekzaEfK5Zh9NI39pXPtrYRdMe0BzMLe mLj7GA9lc37PqrihnRe9Ko5emm+7Vtz/u3/wC5XXN0yX55dSvoiJ/Fqr7hV7BnRemaFq88XXSZtGTINyyj6CRJ7VXV7a10097cqXZrqZFBLMTKyBR xJJ83ArovZ8v+pJevAZz0DtHe+zgz1txEpHZrDN9lcn2VEdrdNdsnCCKSY95 xGnrOW+7VWbs7tS30xhg0Bghc6zpAUFQTwB7WHDFfG8Ww2s7l7eRgxQLkrnH lKG4Z49td4YKipZZO76iMzJDtbpbvpshGWBTw+KXyvtvk+rFYuy9xdoXzCQo +G5y3LMMjvGrLt9Qq5d39y7O2CtDAobAOtsu/1M2SPqxW/wAVweMjDSjGxOW+5DdyujWOwfrjI0s2krnAVAGxnC8zyHEmuemCLVsa7Hcin 7MiGpjVT9NHSRbx282z4z1s8i6XCnyYhkE6j2vw80cu3HbgnUlN5pMslY890 pSvTKClKUApSlAKUpQClKUApSlAcGr46OelcW0cNjtNDblY0EMxB0NHgaNfP ScfKHDvxiqOswnWJ1uer1rr089GfKx44zVwWd1a3SixuerldFHVnIxJHp8iS JhxDaMZUccg8xWLEPnWLovSGdWUMpDKRkFSCCO8EcCK+81QVnu7tDZzFtmXZ Mf/ANExyp+o+QT4+SakVj04SQYTadjLC3bJD5SHx0nl9TGsxJZG9EeqyuR3wS/yGqb6Gm/yhg/Kgcfyn3VPv/dPZt3byql1GjNE40zHqjkqeHl4B59hqueiGTG04vGOQfdz7q9HDfoVEUluj5 6V7YJtKXSAAUjOAAB5gHL+7Ur3/wB3rdNlRzxQRpIeoJZUAOGHHOO/IqP9Mw/yl6beL+aUe4VNN8hr3fU90Ns3tjHvru5NRo+H2I6yPdEGwLa5juOvhSVkdMF xnAYNwHhlSaimzrRF2skZVSgvNGkgFdPWFcYPMY7KmnQU3G89EH/76iN4dG2m8L/8Zh+ddYt8tUjfh9iOCJL01bMjia16qNIwVlBCKqgnMeM4Fb/dJ9e70g7oLpf8T86wOnRfi7U/TkHrVT7q7dw9qwx7FZZpoo89evxkiJxbOB5RHPNZW/8AWg+3+S3/AEyN9DEuNoN9K3cfejb+msLpfTG0pj3xofuAe6tPuHvhb2V4k0z+QI3B0DWc leAAHjivnffe7/8A0rwy2dvO6mNV4pxJXOThc8OIrtKtCGJzN6WISeU9IbOkzFGe9FPrArV7zb 7Wlguq5mVD2IPKkb0IOP1nh41Unwrbl0ixvOtjCEC4jxr0gAAkqS2eHzhXbs vo7toiZJdVxJzLznIz2nTy58fKzXjvc6HO2ekbaG1SYtnRtaWxyGnfg7L4MP N9CZPiBWGuwLXZlq5cddLKpj4jLyM4x1ca8dIOePb3nkK+t4ukqC2XTAOufi Bp4RDH0x52O5fWKgNvv5N10lxIBJMYysRPmxEkZKL2cM/WeOe2LXBG+PEHmK5oTxyeJPOlenTTUUmUYpSlXIFKUoBSlKAUpSgFKUoBW63 a2tDAJ1ni6wSR+RzGJF8pDkcV48NQ4itLSudSmp7kplgWvSFNBMkCN8NQiMK zeS5Z1XIVhzwxIGoE99TUb5QBzDOGgk0hmSVdQ0ntLR6lx6cVRcblSGUkMCC COBBHEEHvzW92PvrcQXDXBIlZ0CPr+UoAA4jiCMCscqEkWuWw2wLC7GoRQS5 5tFpz9qMgita/Rfag5jaeE9hSX8xn21Hf/cCymwbmxAb5yBCc9+oaW9tbe13p2cwwl1cwdwMk/s1a1rm4tEi96M3fiL6ckDAMo18OJAzqHDifXXfNujtB4upbakhi0gaCjacLj SMauzA9VZMO2IG/Z7UOfpm2bs7mjBNZGZj5m0YSD3wQfVxVx+ApmfWDT7M3FvYCeq2lJFqxq6oO ucZxnD8cZPrNdUvRvMXMsu0HJyXZ9BDZHEsWL8+Gc+FSLRc/67b+PxC/92sW8hldGSTaMKqylW0wwDgwwRlnJ5E0zyve4IVcWMckmJrm8mjB89n488ZC NkDjgednsxnhUmXo92dEgkk1upxhnkbjqHDAQAnhUan2fpkMbXcGnOdXXW4U cWbOMlwcu3Idv11m7V2ls+OOMJdTTlGUFesmI0hWHkrhUHZ28q5pysaZQp5o pPR7sklrb7KhGVFuMHGWBZvv5Yjx5eNZcm+1mg0xyGTHyII3c+oAAfWRVaXO 2rQLhFcs0SBnKBiJFJLY1txByO7GK6G3tPlhRjVo4kLq8jsIXSMHh6hxNTap 8pZUqLSef1r+OzUnVx0gOVysccAMYcNPIzZQ6tOmONMk8OWccRx41rId4YJI Vm2hNJPIQT8FjBEa4Y6dSLgHhg5cnnjjUHudrmQ6nZmIi0Anv7K6lvuKcT5I 4+Pt41MYVOKLSpUL6T9af2bLeneJ71l8gRxxgiONBnSDjJYgYycDlw4VpBB5 OrszjxzWQl0MAZYYJ5Y45PbxrkXo4HHy9WPD867xzx2iVVKjbWfrT6fuYxiP cc+g1zJAVOCOP/8Acq7nuhggFiSQePZju419NdjUTluIx4j0cfyq/K1d8o5Gjtm10+/48zF6s9x9Rrgr24rK+GAFeZAzknmQeyuuaVTgDICjhwHPx41eNSpfWJSdGmk 8stf6/Pl2nVo7cHHfg0CHGcHHf2Vkm6GBxYYXGBjHr/8AFcpeAaT5XkjGkcj7fdVeVqfKWVClfp+vXDcxRGT2H1GuCvbWUl4Bo58Cc4 8T7a+JLnKsOPFsj0e6rKpUvrEq6VLLdT1/Cf4MelKVpMgpSlCBSlKAUpSgFKUqWSG5V1UpWGvuWQFcUpWYk7o+VcmuKV6N HYoxSlK7MgUpSoApSlAKUpQClKUApSlAKUpQClKUB//Z

[SOSL]

I don't think defence forces bases figure very highly in the SNP agenda; they probably recognise that they couldn't run their own RN,RM, Army, RAF and SF.

So if they decide to remove themselves from the union they would probably decide to retain a joint defence force with the rest of the UK.

Also they would probably want to retain the jobs, commercial and financial benefits to the Scottish communities close to the bases (not just RAF but RN, RM, Army and SF).

Message is - Scottish independence probably wouldn't affect the defence community.

Best wishes SOS

[Tallsar]

SOSL....2 aspects that might be affected....SNP is avowed anti-deterrent...so much argy bargy re Faslane might be in prospect, and of course the Scottish LFA is probably some of the best low flying training around.....so their view on that might not be helpful either....but then we are all jumping the gun a bit.....the Scottish people are wise enough to make the right decision methinks. ;)

[Neptunus Rex]

The Scots get the very best deal from UK plc. Why would they want to change it?

[The Oberon]

Mods, please can this thread be put in Aircraft History & Nostalgia.

[DFM]

K Flap et al.......For whatever reason the MRA4 has gone to meet it's maker, it's no more, it's deed and I totally accept that fact, trust me.

I am mearly speculating that we now have a situation, whether expected or manufactured, that is even more politically conducive to base closures in Scotland. I sincerely hope I am wrong about Lossie in particular and/or Leuchars, but closing one or both will certainly do less harm to the current Govt than closing a couple in Englandshire. It all sounds very Machiavellian I know, but there seems to be no other good reason for linking Kinloss exclusively with the MRA4. I believe you will struggle to find a base that is better provisioned in respect of real estate, facilities, location and weather suitable for aviation. Moreover, I don't believe any of the high paid help(sic) who visited Kinloss post SDSR answered the question about linkage and appeared totally stumped by the decision to close Kinloss too. However, lets be positive and hope the basing study decision surprises us all in June, and Lossie and Leuchars remain on the map............as RAF bases. :ok:

[Biggus]

DFM

You forgot to mention how well "provisioned" Kinloss is with geese, don't tell me, let me guess....'not a problem with careful planning'?!